Do you believe that unemployment (unemployment as number seeking employment as ratio of labor force/active population) is a chronic problem in France?  If so, do you believe it is a significant one that needs to be addressed?

It is a problem, yes. We should be doing better. Part of it is an employment problem, i.e. a fairly low overall employment rate because older workers have been discouraged and young workers are not welcomed. Part of it is more the problem that this employment is borne by the same people all the time - some are never unemployed (the public sector workers, most well qualified workers), while some spend too much time alternating between employment, often in precarious jobs, and unemployment, and stay forever out of the system.

It's really that two-tier system which is the biggest issue

What is the "old social compact that worked" in France, when did it work, and why did it stop working?

To oversimplify: the 'elites' have the power to lead the country, no questions asked; in return, they treat workers well. Enlightened State paternalism, if you want, with the lites getting social recognition and State power. That compact is being breached because the elites are using their power, just like everywhere else, to grab more money (which usually means squeezing costs, including labor costs). workers are being squeezed, in the name of "globalisation", but see that the elites trying to keep all power as before. Thus that feeling that politicians are out of touch and cheating on them.

Related to the previous question:  You wrote above that

France did make the choice 30 years ago, when unemployment first struck, to protect those in the work market and have flexibility borne by a small subset of the population

and I think you implied that this was a mistake.  If so, what should France have done, and what should it do now to address the problem of unemployment (assuming you do believe that there is such a problem)?

It's hard to tell. what's clear today is that there were irreversible effects of the initial policies: companies have gotten used to hiring less, and hiring only via short term or similarly "flexible" contracts. Even when "normal" jobs get more flexible, they are still used as little as possible by companies which have learnt to behave differently (what Migeru calls an histeresis effect)

I was intrigued to read that another reason you appear to be against the Anglo-Saxon neo-liberal model (besides its alleged unfairness to the non-elites, in particular to the unfair share of precariousness that they have to bear in that model) is that you anticipate a "future energy crisis" that the Anglo-Saxon model will not be able to meet as well as the "old social compact that worked in France".  Can you elaborate on that?

The two questions are only partly related. I think France will be better prepared to face the energy crunch because the State has always been heavily involved in the sector, and has applied long term planning. Nuclear energy, diversification of gas supplies, network safety, strategic reserves, the constitution of very strong companies were made possible by the social compact that gave some (competent) people all the power and gave them the time to plan investments over very long time horizons.

I work as a software programmer, and I love Paris, so one dream I have long held is to be able to start a high-tech company in Paris, probably around 2009/2010 (that timing being for personal reasons).  I have seen the wreckage of enough high-flying start-ups in the U.S. high-tech bubble, and was never personally interested in building to sell out and get rich anyway.  Rather, my goal would simply be to build a good, enduring company based on good products that would generate healthy profits, where people would enjoy working.  Do you think it would be easier to do this in France than in, for example, Germany, the U.K., Japan or the U.S. (all other countries I am also considering, though I would highly prefer to do this in France)?  Do you think I could this using the Contrat Nouvelle Embauche until I grow beyond 20 employees and then (necessarily) switch them to the standard Contrat à Durée Indéterminée?  Alternatively, would it be feasible -- as it has been in my experience in the U.S. and in Japan -- and even preferable to work with independent contractors (again, this would be high-tech sector, specifically software programming and the Internet) than hiring employees?

I really can't say. France does have a strong software sector, so you should find the requisite competences, but beyond that I don't know. The real trigger level is 10 employees. From that point, you have a lot more compliance issues under labor laws (representation, consultation, etc...)

The American in me bristles at the word "elite" (in a sociopolitical context), so I was wondering how you define/use that word.  (I know, I know, obviously the U.S. has its most wealthy families and individuals, its most educated families and individuals, its most politically connected families and individuals.  But it does not automatically follow that these are "elite" in the sense that you mean the word, especially as it applies to France.)  Also, how do you propose to build/nurture/cultivate "a more confident, but more modest elite" in France?  Would you recommend that other EU countries -- indeed, even the EU itself -- do the same?

No, that comment about eliters was specific about France. If French elites want to keep the power they have historically had, and the public legitimacy that went with it, they have to keep their share of the deal, i.e. not sell out to financiers, and be prouder of what their forebears achieved and what they could achieve if they followed their history instead of the imported ideology of others.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes