Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
France is not in decline and the last thing it needs is 'reform' | 103 comments (100 topical, 3 editorial, 0 hidden)
Re: France is not in decline (4.00 / 4)
First, all my congratulations for taking the time to set up this discussion and backing it with facts.

As a summary:

  • There is significative evidence that liberalization rises significantly the revenues of the richest, and only them. (see figures for UK & US) Which tends to prove that the dominant ideology about liberalizing is rather a plea "pro domo" than a objective analysis

  • On the contrary the poorest do not benefit from this liberalization, particularly where health is concerned.

  • This clearly advocate for a real debate for the kind of society people want to live in, and if democracy is rational, it should not be too much "liberalized"

However, this article is not totally conclusive regarding what needs to be done.

People in France do work less on a whole:

  • first because the rate of employed is too low ( went for France from 59,5% in 1995 to 63,1% in 2005 ) (against resp. 68,5% to 71,7% in UK) (sce: eurostat)
  • second because they work less hours in the year (UK: from 1734 hours in 1995 to 1669 hours in 2004, F: from 1626 to 1520 hours)
 (sce: http://oberon.sourceoecd.org/pdf/fact2006pdf/05-01-05.pdf)
(theese data take into account part-time workers)

So it is quite obvious that France is getting poorer as a whole because we work less in France. But the first reason is unemployment, long unproductive studies and early retirement. Not "35H"
This could however be a choice of life. In reality, median wages are low and most people prefer to work more

However, we still don't see here how to create those jobs  
From that matter, this article does not help us to know if liberalization is good or not. We're only told that public spending can be a solution, if you can afford it

My opinion on this is that we need to boost the ability of our Small Businesses to export, and benefit from worldwide growth

by HugoMe on Mon Sep 10th, 2007 at 08:41:49 PM EST
Thanks for that constructive comment (4.00 / 3)
I agree that we must end up with the question of what to do to actually resolve the real problems that our economy faces.

On this site, we discuss a lot about long term sustainability, the ability to withstand the coming climate change and energy shocks and to focus less on growth and more on actual quality of living for most people, but this is hard to do in the current political environment.

In the medium term, a focus on small entreprises is certainly a good thing, and there is indeed a lot that could be done in thatdirection. In the short term, dealing with the fallout of the financial crisis is goign to be the big priority - and it has links to my article, as the financial crisis is the bursting of an asset bubble that was highly profitable to the very rich minority which has perverted our economic discourse.

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

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Tue Sep 11th, 2007 at 03:37:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: Thanks for that constructive comment (4.00 / 3)
Another track for more growth which is completely outfashioned is cooperation between european economies. i wonder why.

Another direction, pretty obvious, is a better use of new telecommunications technologies. There is so much to be done here !

by HugoMe on Tue Sep 11th, 2007 at 07:20:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: France is not in decline (4.00 / 2)
The point isn't that France doesn't have any problems, but that the real problems aren't those identified by the media and pop  economists. The solutions being proposed by the free-marketeers will make things worse, not better, for the people of France.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Sep 11th, 2007 at 03:40:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: France is not in decline (4.00 / 4)
Hi HugoMe, welcome to ET!

A few notes:

The "rate of employed" you quoted is usually for 15-64, you seem to imply that the higher the better. Hence having 100% of 15-24 work full time (and no study) is better in the long run for the economy? Right? Having housing workers move weights from 55 to 64? So you have to be careful. Second point as you note part time is 25% in the UK and 15% in France, this is not shown by the statistic you used.

About hours worked the statistics you cite comes from OECD however if you look at the OECD document there's a big warning in the first page of the document: hours worked as shown by OECD are not comparable between countries (for example extra work hours are counted in for the UK but not counted for France). They say time serie is useful for trend but I doubt that fact because of the source of the measure.

On the solution part there's a lot to say but if you're looking at the wrong measure you're unlikely to come up with working solutions.

by Laurent GUERBY on Tue Sep 11th, 2007 at 07:07:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: France is not in decline (none / 1)
The rate of employed in the age 55-64 is really to low in France (in 2005, 37,9 % against 44,1% in the EU-15, 56,9 % in the UK). it is not sustainable with the highest life expectancy in Europe (78 y)
So if you take out the few % where work is indeed physically demanding, you can without any problem get higher than our current level.

Concerning young people, I don't see the point of luring people in thinking they will have jobs when their specialization wil not provide them to them. I am an advocate for more money for less people in universities

You're right that UK's model is to put low qualified people on part time jobs, while in france they don't get any. I'm not sure this is wrong, even if, i agree, it nuances the figures i put forward

Regarding the disclaimer about non comparability, i did not see something as precise as you say. However, i tend to believe that the difference still remains (it is 149 hours / year, or more than 3 hours/week. i don't see every worker in france doing so much extra work hour)

by HugoMe on Tue Sep 11th, 2007 at 07:04:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
All good points (4.00 / 2)
but it should be noted that the rate of employment of the 55-64 has been growing strongly in France (from a low base) - but again, mostly during the Jospin government.

Same for the employment rate (only to 2003 in the graph below)

The result is that participation rate has stagnated in France - since 2002. So let's not blame "socialist" policies for the fact that France is not working enough - the problem is rightwing immobilism.



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

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Sep 12th, 2007 at 03:45:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: All good points (4.00 / 2)
I would say that leftwing has always been more proactive in searching to lower unemployment but are anyway responsible for lowering retirement age and pushing peole to universities.
When you look at what was accomplished in the 80's, (end of price control, of capital transfer restrictions, new stock exchange...) it's pretty impressive. On the contrary , I tend to think that rightwing is often too close to big corporations and money power, and tend to agree to their requests.
I also prefer to help the weak, because the strong always find a way

Considering 35 H, i think it is a courageous political act and on the whole beneficial to the economy short term because it brought flexibility and also ~ 200 000 jobs (controversy on the right number). And also leisure time
I don't know if it was beneficial in the long term, because the bad performances of our economiy, relatively to other european countries, after 2002 could be linked to what was made before (there's a lot of inertia)

But apart from theese small adapations, i really think that the european model is in great danger, because 1,3 billion people in China are in the line to get more purchasing power.

This war, "economical war" one used to say, cannot be won by lowering our low-qualified wages. We 're too far from them. So there's a need to be more productive

By "more productive" I mean raise production. And this means innovation and time-to-market through better use of NTIC

by HugoMe on Wed Sep 12th, 2007 at 06:44:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: France is not in decline (4.00 / 5)
Last night I watched a talk show on TV5Monde (Mots croises), all participants (including representatives of the government, small businesses, UMP, PS, and CGT) concurred - didn't object that the french work less per week than others. Besides the info presented by Jerome, and the OECD data discussed by HugoMe and Laurent, here is what I found at Eurostat:

Mean number of hours worked per week in 2006 according to Eurostat.

Definition: Average number of usual weekly hours of work in main job, full-time/part-time. It includes all hours including extra hours, either paid or unpaid, but excludes the travel time between home and the place of work as well as the main meal breaks (normally taken at midday). Persons who have also worked at home are asked to include the number of hours they have worked at home. Apprentices, trainees and other persons in vocational training are asked to exclude the time spent in school or other special training centres

UK: 36.9
Danemark: 35.3
France: 38.1
Germany (2005): 35.7
Italy: 38.6
Netherland: 30.9
Sweden: 36.4

Most other EU countries since 1991 listed here: Hours of work per week Eurostat data set

So what gives? Is there something we don't know about Eurostat data? Why are the CGT and the PS drinking the Kool-Aid on this?

by Fete des fous on Fri Sep 14th, 2007 at 04:23:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: France is not in decline (4.00 / 2)
This would be worth to put into a diary.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Fri Sep 14th, 2007 at 05:06:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: France is not in decline (4.00 / 3)
As I said here, even left leaning economists now believe the unemployment figure and low hour worked fantasy.

This is the power of propaganda.

http://guerby.org/blog/index.php/2007/02/27/151-heures-travaillees

by Laurent GUERBY on Sat Sep 15th, 2007 at 07:47:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: France is not in decline (4.00 / 3)
For hours worked, you have the full disclaimer listed on my blog:

http://guerby.org/blog/index.php/2007/02/27/151-heures-travaillees

On quote here to give you the extent:

[...]For example, data for the Netherlands exclude overtime hours--helping to explain the relatively low annual hours for this country.[...]

more money for less people in universities

In France this policy is already there via "grandes écoles".

And I assume you've read studies on those who got to university because of 1968 events relative to their before and after peers before wanting to throw out more people from universities :).

by Laurent GUERBY on Sat Sep 15th, 2007 at 07:45:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: France is not in decline (4.00 / 3)
HugoMe, a belated welcome!

When you say :

UK's model is to put low qualified people on part time jobs

I think you're not entirely right. Take a look at Soundbite Statistics: the Unemployment Rate (1) where I explain in detail how long-term unemployment (mainly among low-skilled workers) is hidden in Incapacity Benefit (maladie longue durée) in the UK. The UK unemployment rate is simply false.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sun Sep 16th, 2007 at 08:54:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

France is not in decline and the last thing it needs is 'reform' | 103 comments (100 topical, 3 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: