French people deny that they are lazy

Quote from the Polish "The Journal" newspaper:

"30 years ago, every summer car factories were closed. I think that is the reason for why people think that France is a country where people don't work", Yannick Laude, a Frenchman, tells "The Journal".

This Frenchman is wrong. The true reason for why people think that France is a country whose population doesn't work is that the French working week is 35 hours.

[edit on 31-7-2006 by JimmyCarterIsNotSmarter]

mod edit:
Quote Reference (review link)
Posting work written by others. **ALL MEMBERS READ** (review link)

[edit on 11-8-2006 by UK Wizard]

...a 35 hour week that gives them one of the most precious luxuries OF ALL in this day and age:

Time to spend for themselves and with their families. This is an unparalleled source of living quality. There is a reason why France is famous for its vibrant civil life - sometimes they just know how to set the preferences to make living worthwhile WITHOUT earning heaps of money.

Of course this doesnt fit into the prude and crude protestant-influenced angloamerican economy models. But the French have been quite happy with this attitude for decades and centuries.

[edit on 31/7/2006 by Lonestar24]

Originally posted by Lonestar24
...a 35 hour week that gives them one of the most precious luxuries OF ALL in this day and age

What are you talking about? France's economic growth rate is 1.4%, unemployment is 10% and the debt burden is 77.5%.

Time to spend for themselves and with their families. This is an unparalleled source of living quality. There is a reason why France is famous for its vibrant civil life - sometimes they just know how to set the preferences to make living worthwhile WITHOUT earning much money.

The cost of spending so much time for themselves and with their families is that they had to import a violent Muslim fifth column to support their welfare state. The cost is also that they enjoy poorer healthcare than Americans. America's GDP per capita is $41800. France's is $29900.

Of course this doesnt fit into the prude and crude protestant-influenced angloamerican economy models.

The American economy is performing well while fulfilling the needs of American citizens as they earn on average $41800 every year.

But the French have been quite happy with this attitude for decades and centuries.

By the end of this century there'll be no French people, France will be Muslim.

[edit on 31-7-2006 by JimmyCarterIsNotSmarter]

I don´t know which post you just answered to, it certainly wasnt mine as it seems. Are you aware that there is a world OUTSIDE of economic figures, of growth rates, GDP per capita and such? Are you aware that there is something more important to many people than simple economic prowess - a healthy, fulfilling, satisfying life? Why do you think that people go on vacation? Why they go to the opera? why they go to the lake at weekends? why the spend the holidays with their families?

Because it will increase the growth rates by 0,00001%? Or because they ENJOY these activites, and because they try to enjoy their life as much as possible?

There is a reason why some men suddenly get to their midlife crisis, start taking sunbaths, buying Porsche´s and expensive Hi-Fi equipment - because at one point in their life when they creepily become aware that they have lived more years than they have left to live, they realize that all they got from their years of hard working and 10-hour workdays, is a business card that says "vice-president", a comfortable bank account and two failed marriages.

These people suddenly realize that you can use your life for another thing than to solely earn money: to LIVE YOUR LIFE. And they also realize that they wasted their best years in an office for someone elses next million bucks. The french simply got the part right where it says that your private life starts when you are born, and not when you´re 55 and don´t have to work anymore but when it is also too late to enjoy many things the life can offer and that money cant buy.

Originally posted by Lonestar24
Are you aware that there is something more important to many people than simple economic prowess - a healthy, fulfilling, satisfying life?

Are you aware that this goal won't be achieved without money? For example, how are they going to pay for their healthcare?

[edit on 31-7-2006 by JimmyCarterIsNotSmarter]

Originally posted by JimmyCarterIsNotSmarter

Originally posted by Lonestar24
Are you aware that there is something more important to many people than simple economic prowess - a healthy, fulfilling, satisfying life?

Are you aware that this goal won't be achieved without money? For example, how are they going to pay for their healthcare?

[edit on 31-7-2006 by JimmyCarterIsNotSmarter]

As long as it is payable, why wouldn't you? The US system can always be adopted in times of crisis.

Originally posted by JimmyCarterIsNotSmarter

Originally posted by Lonestar24
Are you aware that there is something more important to many people than simple economic prowess - a healthy, fulfilling, satisfying life?

Are you aware that this goal won't be achieved without money? For example, how are they going to pay for their healthcare?

As usual you are only seeing this as a black-or-white issue.

And you are missing the point. Do you know why the healthcare systems are strained more and more? Because of the so-called "civilisation illnesses". Problems with the back because of too much time in the office chair. Problems with the hands and eyes for working too much on a computer. Problems with the heart because of too little activity. Problems with the joints because the muscles arent used enough anymore. Problems with the soul and psychosomatic sicknesses because people are getting too stressed. Obesity and heart failures because of unhealthy lifestyles.

Do you know what the easiest prevention for all this is? Leisure time, and improving your quality of life. Every 1st year medical student can tell you that. And thats why a healthy life doesnt need healthcare. And the French are quite good at it - one sign for this is that they pay huge sums on better and healthier food compared to other western countries.

Its not even a new idea. For example even back in the high days of Judaism, there was the concept of the Sabbath ("šhabbat": the [day] of rest (or ceasing)). The wholeidea of recreation or leisure time has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with "lazyness". Instead, it is cultural good.

[edit on 31/7/2006 by Lonestar24]

If we really want black and white, I think it really comes down to one question - is human life about working to produce the most wealth possible - who cares about the children, daycare can take care of them, and besides, if they complain, buy them a trinket to shut them up - until, at age 65, you're officially declared spoiled goods and hidden from society until you pass away? Or is it about trying to achieve the best possible balance in your life where you work as much as possible to provide for your family's needs while trying to enjoy what your work buys you: valuable time with your family?

I can't blame the French for having a 35 hour work week, I mean all the jobs I've ever had (paying up to like US$100,000/yr) were 35 hrs/wk. But making it a law and keeping low-waged, unskilled people from working longer hours to make more money for their families is just wrong.

djohnston - viewed from that angle, agreed. People shouldn't be forced to work only 35 hours a week if they want to work more. A friend of mine spent a year working overtime translating a document totalling one million words, which gave him enough money to pay his house... that's an individual choice I more than respect (and sometimes envy, though he was tired as hell when it was done).

But we should also respect the choice of people who decide that not working more than 35 hours a week is important to them because they want quality time with their family.

Originally posted by djohnsto77
I can't blame the French for having a 35 hour work week, I mean all the jobs I've ever had (paying up to like US$100,000/yr) were 35 hrs/wk. But making it a law and keeping low-waged, unskilled people from working longer hours to make more money for their families is just wrong.

May I ask where you read a French law forbids working any longer than 35 hours a week? To be honest with you, I don't believe such a law does exist.

Originally posted by Mdv2
May I ask where you read a French law forbids working any longer than 35 hours a week? To be honest with you, I don't believe such a law does exist.

Here ya go:

Triplet.com
The standard French working week is 35 hours, having been reduced from 39 hours. The statutory provisions are set out in articles L.212-1 et seq. of the French Employment Code.

The 35-hour week came into effect, on 1 January 2000, for businesses with more than 20 employees and on 1 January 2002, for businesses with 20 employees or less. This legislation was consistently "watered down" in 2003: it is now possible for companies to keep employees' working time up to 39 hours (or more) per week, for a negotiable extra cost.

Employees may not waive their rights under the statutory provisions by contract. However, very senior management executives within a company may be exempted from all of the restrictions on working time, pursuant to article L.212-15-1 of the Employment Code.

I am pretty sure this legislation simply means employees cannot be forced to work more than 35 hours. At least that's how the company I work for has interpreted it.

Up until a few years ago, the Germans, who are thought of as hardworking, worked only 30 or 35 hour weeks. Also, the American economy only looks good on paper. Our trade deficit is horrendous and we owe more money than any other nation on Earth. Our unemployment is around 7 to 8%, not all that much better than France.

And where did you get the figure of the average American making $41,000 per year?? I really doubt that, the minimum wage is $5 something per hour. You need to back up your assertions with references and facts.

The French are not lazy, they simply think it's more important to enjoy life rather than be workaholics, as many Americans are. They do know how to enjoy life and I applaud them for that.

What's your problem with the French any way?

P.S. - The French may not spend as much per person on health care (according to your estimate), but at least every French person HAS health care, it's socialized. In America, fully half the people here have no health care whatsoever.

Originally posted by forestlady
Up until a few years ago, the Germans, who are thought of as hardworking, worked only 30 or 35 hour weeks.

Untrue. The average real working week in Germany was never below 39.5 hours/week (Source [in german], page 4, "Abbildung 1").

Since 1990 it is possible to have a contractual 35 hour week. The Standard is still 36-38.5 hours, and that is almos always exceeded by one or two hours. The average working week in Germany is either conform to European standard, or is longer than the European Standard (EU: 39,1h - Germany: 40.9h). This depends on the source and method of counting.

German law only says that work should not exceed 8h per day on a 6 month average.

Our unemployment is around 7 to 8%, not all that much better than France.

I think his´ is the official number. The problem I see however is that the rules what qualifies as "employment" and whatnot are relatively lax in the USA- meaning that people are listed as employed while in fact their wage and workhours are not enough to sustain their costs of life. This leads the USA to the problem of double and triple employment.

And where did you get the figure of the average American making $41,000 per year?? I really doubt that, the minimum wage is $5 something per hour. You need to back up your assertions with references and facts.

Its not the average income, it is the GDP per capita, giving an index of GDP relative to country size. The main reason why it is so high however can rather be found in the USAs role as financial services center of the world - for the same reason Luxembourg has a GDP per capita of 48.000 US$.

What's your problem with the French any way?

He´s a fanboy of polish xenophobia and anti-europeanism.

[edit on 3/8/2006 by Lonestar24]

Lonestar, I dont speak German, so I cannot understand or know what is in your source. I got my info from a German friend I met about 5 years ago. The typical work week in Germany, according to her, was I think 35 hours. They raised it about 4 or 5 years ago.

And I don't know what estimate was given on that source for unemployment, but I have read (forget where) in the news that unemployment is about 7 to 8%. Just wanted to say where I got my info from.

Originally posted by forestlady
Lonestar, I dont speak German, so I cannot understand or know what is in your source. I got my info from a German friend I met about 5 years ago. The typical work week in Germany, according to her, was I think 35 hours. They raised it about 4 or 5 years ago.

I didn´t expect you to speak german, or read the document. I mainly gave the source to note that I don´t get my numbers out of thin air

The important information however is that this document shows that the weekly worktime of the last 30 years never was below an average of 39.5h, and because of that the information your friend gave you is simply wrong. BTW, I can produce other sources on this, too, but this one was the only one showing it in a longtime graph.

What is true is that in certain branches the worktime was based on a 35-38 hour week. Still the usual time on average wasand is 38-40h. This does not include the occasional overtime which is quite regular in every branch that doesnt operate on a shift system.

And I don't know what estimate was given on that source for unemployment, but I have read (forget where) in the news that unemployment is about 7 to 8%. Just wanted to say where I got my info from.

US government sourecs center around 5%. But as I said, this is also because the rules for what qualifies as employment and what not are rather minimal in the USA, which is why occasionally there will be a Washington Times journalist popping up and playing the Devil´s Advocate and fights the hopeless fight against this kind of data manipulation.

One example for this is Walmart, one of the largest employer in the USA. They have thze habit of employing people on a 27h-per-week contract. I believe this counts as full employment for the government institutions, but also saves Walmart some obligations that would come with a real full-time job. And I think we can agree that you cant really live on a 27 hour contract coupled with Walmart´s wages, so these people often need another income. In other countries this counts as a halftime occupation and is not fully counted into the employment statistic.

! The above statement is based on what I remember reading over the past years, it MAY be completely inaccurate !

Germany's unemployment rate is 11.5%, frances is just as bad. The US is @ 4.8%.

The US national debt is at 268 billion as of yesterday.

When it comes to healthcare.........The US population is much greater than either france or Germany @ ~300 million.

One has to be remember that france has a socialist government whereas both the US and Germany are Democracy's.

Originally posted by ferretman2
When it comes to healthcare.........The US population is much greater than either france or Germany @ ~300 million.

Ferretman, obviously you have no knowledge at all on this matter.

First of all the US healthcare system is rubbish, after all a simple carpenter wouldn't go to India for his medical treatment if he would have been able to do so in the US. I cannot speak for France or Germany, but in the European country I live such surgeries are fully covered by affordable health insurance, even the lowest levels of society are able to have to health insurance to cover medical costs, funded by the government's social policy.

NEW DELHI -- Three months ago, Howard Staab learned that he suffered from a life-threatening heart condition and would have to undergo surgery at a cost of up to $200,000 -- an impossible sum for the 53-year-old carpenter from Durham, N.C., who has no health insurance.
So he outsourced the job to India taking his cue from cost-cutting U.S. businesses, Staab last month flew about 7,500 miles to the Indian capital, where doctors at the Escorts Heart Institute & Research Centre -- a sleek aluminum-colored building across the street from a bicycle-rickshaw stand -- replaced his balky heart valve with one harvested from a pig. Total bill: about $10,000, including round-trip airfare and a planned side trip to the Taj Mahal.
www.washingtonpost.com...

Originally posted by ferretman2
One has to be remember that france has a socialist government whereas both the US and Germany are Democracy's.

Are you suggesting France isn't a democracy, or that socialism cannot go together with democracy?

Originally posted by ferretman2
Germany's unemployment rate is 11.5%, frances is just as bad. The US is @ 4.8%.

First of all, you should follow the economic news more closesly: German Unemployment Rate Falls to Lowest in Almost Two Years Rate: 10.6% Source: Bloomberg

Second, people still don't seem to understand how those US figures are deliberately being manipulated. To the Bush administration it is important that a low unemployment rate reflects the merits of their policies, and thus to convince the American public that their policies are beneficial for the US, and basically that they are doing a good job.

Reality differs.

How exactly are the US unemployment figures being manipulated, or adjusted, whatever you'd like to define it as.

Huff's book has long been out of print, but I suspect that dog-eared copies are still carefully hidden in the desk drawers of many advertising copywriters, public relations
consultants, politicians and even some economists. Or maybe they learned how to lie with statistics without Huff's help.Examples of statistical fabrication abound: the UN's bogus ranking of Canada as No. 1 on its Human Development Index; the Gross Domestic Product, which rates all economic growth as good, even crime and pollution; and Canada's official unemployment rate, which omits discouraged and involuntary
part-time workers.

If I were to pick the most dishonest case of statistical skullduggery, it would probably be the official unemployment rate in the US. This rate -now claimed to be down to five per cent - completely disregards the millions of people who have given up looking for work, as well as those who are working fewer than 20 hours a week but would prefer full-time jobs. The calculation of the U.S. unemployment rate, however, is done much more deceitfully, and with some of the most blatant statistical perversions
ever devised.

For that country's business and political leaders, it is important that the national jobless rate reflect the merits of their policies. Mass layoffs, part-time work, job
insecurity, big corporate tax breaks, cuts in welfare and UI benefits are not conducive to a lower rate of unemployment. In fact, they invariably have the very opposite effect. But the political flunkeys want to convince the American public that their free market approach benefits workers as much as shareholders. And how better to peddle that lie as the truth than with the crafty misuse of statistics.

According to the Council on International and Public Affairs (CIPA), the real U.S. rate of unemployment, if properly calculated, would be 11.4 per cent - more than double the official rate. The CIPA listed seven major changes in the definitions of "employed" and "unemployed" that were made in the U.S. methodology that have had the combined effect of substantially reducing the number of
Americans officially listed as being jobless.

Among the categories dropped from the labour force survey, in addition to the discouraged, were the under-16 group, those on strike or locked out and those who weren't actively looking for work in the four weeks prior to the survey. But by far the largest group omitted from the list of jobless in the U.S. are the working-age men who are out of work because they are in prison or on parole.

The 1.5 million American men in jail and the 8.1 million on parole make up nearly 10 per cent of that country's male workforce. By not including them in its labour force survey, the U.S. is able to reduce its official unemployment rate by more than five per cent.

Just as the omission of a large group of unemployed can drastically skew the statistics, so can the inclusion of a group whose members are virtually 100 per cent employed - such as the members of the U.S. armed forces. By lumping
these 1.5 million army, navy, air force and marine personnel
in with the civilian workforce, the official unemployment
rate is reduced by nearly another one per cent.

Ed Finn is a research associate with the Canadian Centre for
Policy Alternatives.

A comment in general on this thread, it's as ignorant as generalizing that all Americans are fat and stupid.




[edit on 19-8-2006 by Mdv2]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mod Edit

[edit on 19-8-2006 by masqua]