When I wrote back in 2012 that France was committing fiscal suicide, I should have guessed that President Hollande would get impatient and push for even more statism.
Sure enough, the BBC reports that France’s President has a new plan. The ostensible goal is to reduce unemployment, but the practical effect is to expand the size and scope of government.
President Francois Hollande has set out a €2bn (£1.5bn) job creation plan in an attempt to lift France out of what he called a state of “economic emergency”. Under a two-year scheme, firms with fewer than 250 staff will get subsidies if they take on a young or unemployed person for six months or more. In addition, about 500,000 vocational training schemes will be created.
Needless to say, if subsidies and handouts were the key to job creation, France already would have full employment.
In reality, real jobs are created when employers think that new employees will produce profits. But that’s a difficult hurdle in a country like France.
Though, in the interest of fairness, I should acknowledge that Hollande claims this plan will not involve a net increase in the burden of government spending.
Mr Hollande said money for the plan would come from savings in other areas of public spending. “These €2bn will be financed without any new taxes of any kind,” said President Hollande, who announced the details during an annual speech to business leaders.
Though I suspect that this claim is about as believable as Obama’s laughable assertion that government-run healthcare would lower premiums and allow people to keep their health plans.
But the strangest part of the BBC story involves Hollande’s contortions on labor market policy. See if you can decipher this passage.
The president also addressed the issue of labour market flexibility. “Regarding the rules for hiring and laying off, we need to guarantee stability and predictability to both employers and employees. There is room for simplification,” he said. “The goal is also more security for the company to hire, to adapt its workforce when economic circumstances require, but also more security for the employee in the face of change and mobility”.
I gather Hollande wants people to believe he has some sort of magic wand that will magically give companies flexibility while also guaranteeing workers stability.
Put me in the skeptical column. I would be stunned if France actually liberalized its calcified labor markets. The unions are too powerful and too shortsighted to realize that employers will always be reluctant to hire unless they know they have the ability to fire.
Besides, why would unemployed people, particularly those with low skill levels, want jobs when redistribution programs make idleness comparatively attractive?
Meanwhile, those with high skills will continue to escape the country.
So the bottom line is that France’s slow-motion economic suicide will continue. Hollande’s foolish policies simply mean the day of reckoning will come a bit sooner.
Let’s close with something that’s both revealing and amusing. One of America’s movie stars, Will Smith, had a very interesting wake-up moment on French TV.
I wonder what Mr. Smith would say if he knew that some French taxpayers actually have faced tax burdens of more than 100 percent (though Hollande, with his infinite mercy, then decided that the upper limit should be 80 percent).
P.S. My friend Veronique de Rugy (an escapee from France) warns Americans about the dangers of adopting the policies of her former country in this video.
P.P.S. Sadly, American statists have been urging European-type statism in the United States for decades. To see where that leads, check out these cartoons from Michael Ramirez, Glenn Foden, Eric Allie and Chip Bok.
[…] in the United States may be even bigger than the problems in decrepit welfare states such as France and […]
[…] In recent years, France has had terrible presidents such as Nicolas Sarkozy and Francois Hollande. […]
[…] in the United States may be even bigger than the problems in decrepit welfare states such as France and […]
[…] in the United States may be even bigger than the problems in decrepit welfare states such as France and […]
[…] in the United States may be even bigger than the problems in decrepit welfare states such as France and […]
[…] in the United States may be even bigger than the problems in decrepit welfare states such as France and […]
[…] in the United States may be even bigger than the problems in decrepit welfare states such as France and […]
[…] in the United States may be even bigger than the problems in decrepit welfare states such as France and […]
[…] in the United States may be even bigger than the problems in decrepit welfare states such as France and […]
[…] over the socialist, but made a serious point that Macron – despite having been part of Hollande’s disastrous government – was preferable since there was at least a hope of market-oriented […]
[…] he used to be part of the previous socialist government that sought to make things worse rather than better. But I figured he was most likely to enact some pro-market reforms. And it […]
[…] of which seems rather surreal. After all, Macron was a minister in the failed socialist government of Francois Hollande, so who would have thought that we would be the one to lead an effort to shrink the burden of […]
[…] of which seems rather surreal. After all, Macron was a minister in the failed socialist government of Francois Hollande, so who would have thought that we would be the one to lead an effort to shrink the burden of […]
[…] contrast, at least I can say with great confidence that I will be able to continue using France as an example of bad public policy. I realize that’s not an ideal outcome for the French people, but you know what they say […]
[…] P.S.3: Veja também esta entrevista bastante reveladora de Will Smith sobre a tributação na França. […]
[…] Or watch this rather revealing Will Smith interview about French […]
[…] Or watch this rather revealing Will Smith interview about French […]
[…] Or watch this rather revealing Will Smith interview about French […]
[…] in the United States may be even bigger than the problems in decrepit welfare states such as France and […]
[…] in the United States may be even bigger than the problems in decrepit welfare states such as France and […]
[…] in the United States may be even bigger than the problems in decrepit welfare states such as France and […]
[…] Watch Will Smith’s reaction after being told France has a top tax rate of 75 […]
[…] Actually, I’m even willing to say that France is an ideal role model. But only if nations emulate the France of 1870 rather than the France of 2016. […]
[…] world has an epiphany about greedy and corrupt government. It definitely happened for Jon Lovitz, Will Smith, and Rob Schneider. And it might be happening for George […]
[…] any good libertarian, I generally focus on the size of government. I compareFrance with Hong Kong and that tells me that big is bad and small is […]
[…] any good libertarian, I generally focus on the size of government. I compare France with Hong Kong and that tells me that big is bad and small is […]
[…] any good libertarian, I generally focus on the size of government. I compare France with Hong Kong and that tells me that big is bad and small is […]
[…] any good libertarian, I generally focus on the size of government. I compare France with Hong Kong and that tells me that big is bad and small is […]
There is no need to switch off the lights in a socialist country. The lights go off by themselves.
[…] isn’t intentional, but there’s been a European theme to this week’s posts. I wrote yesterday about economic chaos in France, and the previous day I wrote about the grim consequences of Italian […]
comic relief:
“French Border Flooded by German Refugees”
OfflineChedoh
http://thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/french-border-flooded-by-german-refugees-t17418.html
.
youth unemployment in France is over 25%… adults over 10%… Hollande has no idea what he’s doing… and the crisis is looming… social… economic and political… 2 billion euros given to socialist cronies… and no tax increase to cover it… you just know the government can make it up in savings… you just know it… and on the ground further restrictions of civil liberties… a fine nest of terrorists… waiting to strike and thousands of people leaving France… because they fear for their safety and the safety of their families…
for more information on the situation on the ground in France:
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7256/france-islamization
[…] « French President Approaches Cliff, Steps on Accelerator […]
As I said yesterday about Italy, it is also too late for France. It’s too late for all of Europe, especially under the EU cartel that imposes uniformity in statism and does not allow individual countries to even attempt breaking away from statism.
So, in a way, the sooner France collapses the sooner the opportunity for fundamental reform will come. But that too will be a long shot.
The French people have painted themselves in a corner. They have built a society where everybody is servant to everyone else, …and nobody wants to work. At least not work with sufficient enthusiasm to outcompete more motivated people worldwide. With a less motivated workforce, French companies systemically come up short on value/cost ratio and thus driven to extinction by more competitive enterprises worldwide. The population has empirically internalized the effects of this failure and so they don’t even try. Companies are not even started. Why waste your youth trying to build a company that will ultimately succumb to international competition and fail? Go get a government job and focus your energy on non-pecuniary standard of living enhancers.
As everyone is a dependent of everyone else, French society has become deadlocked. “Prosperity in France is declining as the country cannot keep up with world average growth rates. Imagine how much worse I would be if government withdrew my healthcare support, education support, housing support, transportation support”. That becomes the dominant mentality of the electorate. Breaking away from this low growth stagnation becomes impossible.
Any politician with substantial pro-growth reforms does not last long in France. Hollandes may come and go. It does not matter. French voters will find another statist, ferret him/her out of obscurity and propel him/her into high office.
Only when the country hits bottom, Soviet style bottom, there will be opportunity for reform. And even so, it may take a couple of generations to regain the political capital amongst the population, if it all goes well. As countries of the ex-Soviet bloc have proven, regime change is possible. But rebuilding political capital amongst an electorate that has grown up in statism is a much more difficult process.
If American voters do not understand that, then there is no hope for them either. The face of the American Armageddon can be best seen right here in Silicon Valley, where I live part-time. Most people in this progressive area want a European style welfare state. In other words, the smartest people in America, the people who are building America’s future… want to Europeanize! What better leading indicator as to where the country is headed?
Humans have the strong ability to notice associations. It is amazing that people have little ability to see what causes what. That is the socialist failing.
Employment and production are associated with comfort and prosperity. Socialists see employment as the problem. They want to increase employment. They propose layers of schemes to bribe companies into employing more people and to prevent companies from firing people.
Socialists see two benefits from companies: what they produce and how many people they employ. Their fundamental error is that “what they produce” is a benefit, but “how many they employ” is a cost. The aim of all people except politicians is to produce more while employing less.
One must be strong to accept this. Any productive effort you are looking at (in existence at the moment) can only add to the general welfare by producing more and employing less. That is, a smaller group of people can each earn more by each producing more. Fewer people produce and divide up greater wealth, each becoming wealthier.
What about the people who are no longer needed in that production? This is the hard part. They must be employed in something that is expanded or is new. Restated, they must be employed in a job which doesn’t exist at the moment. That is at the discretion of the millions of people who know what they are doing and will bet on the future. They must be allowed to personally and dramatically benefit from arranging future production.
Those jobs which are yet to exist are hard to identify from above. No politician can subsidize our path to prosperity. Building more “infrastructure” employs people, but the value produced is only the value of that infrastructure. The cost of doing that is the money (resources) given to the people who build the infrastructure. The more they are paid, the less valuable is the infrastructure project. This makes the average person’s head hurt.
Restated, politicians made the US poorer by building hundreds of miles of sidewalks to nowhere during the stimulus project. The salaries were a cost, a burden on the production of other people. The sidewalks were the only benefit, really of almost no benefit to anyone.
The needed new jobs come from serving the people who are wealthier because they are producing more per head. The people who were fired have the opportunity to produce things which the un-fired people can now afford, because they are producing more. The problem of prosperity is to imagine and produce the things which the more efficient (the un-fired) want.
Put more simply, Group-A becomes more efficient and fires some people. A businessman takes a risk to hire those people into Group-B, which produces things which Group-A wants. The people of Group-B buy some of the “extra” production of Group-A. Everyone ends up with more stuff.
This happens thousands of times, working out a complicated network of more efficient groups all with more income and producing things more cheaply to sell to the other groups.
Politicians cannot make everyone wealthier by pressuring current groups, and they don’t have the knowledge to know which products are the ones which will be wanted in the future. New jobs are produced through a creative act of risk entirely beyond central planning.
The Soviet Union could produce block upon block of dreary, concrete housing, because that could be understood and copied. The Grand Leader cannot sit planners at a table and order them to produce “something new” which is at the same time something which people want. And, there is no one wealthy enough to buy something new if the older businesses of the society cannot restructure to become more efficient and fire people.
Much of this happens where it cannot be measured or even seen, so it is very hard for people to accept, especially the part about being fired. So, politicians work hard to increase costs and do more things next week the same way as they are done today.
Reblogged this on Public Secrets and commented:
France has been dirigiste since Louis XIV centralized all power under him, and the French leadership has been trapped in that intellectual straitjacket ever since. The idea of lowering the burden of government and letting market forces work is probably inconceivable to President Hollande — and most of his people.
France is the middle of Europe. There are no tiger economies in Europe. In fact there are no economies whose growth trendline even remotely approaches average world growth trendline. In other words, there are no countries in Europe that are on trajectory to maintain their worldwide economic prosperity ranking. Perhaps Ireland, occasionally. The famed German economic engine only achieves a growth trendline that is half the world average. It is only admired because amongst the (European) blind the one eyed (Germany) is king. But the growth numbers are unequivocal. The entire European continent is on fast decline, Germany included. The European continent’s share of world GDP has been falling precipitously in the past four decades, and continues to do so at an accelerating pace. Europe just can’t keep up with the rest of a much faster developing humans.
But France is the European average. In aggregate, France encapsulates the European mentality average. Now… this French middle road has recently taken the de-facto lead in mandating the European south (Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal) on how it will reform into growth and thus maintain current developed world prosperity status. What can possibly be wrong with that plan?!
So hold on to your hope. France, the European middle road, has been assigned to teach Greece (and others) how to become a 0.5% growth trendline economy. Better times are ahead for Europe! Recovery is just around the corner.
P.S. Yes, world growth has shown some weakening signs lately, slowing from its recent mid-term trendline of 4% to perhaps 3% in the coming year. But that is likely a temporary phenomenon. Yes, eventually, in the mid term, OECD may even manage to capture most countries in a slow growth pattern. But even that will not work permanently. The genie of fast and ever accelerating human growth is out of the bottle. The OECD will not manage to subdue every country into a French Pan-World economy. As the OECD suppresses growth averages, eventually, the benefits of breaking away will become uncontainable. A few countries will eventually estimate that the benefits of breaking away will outweigh the risks and effects of vengeful retaliation. The cartel will unravel. We are likely to first see this type of cartel unraveling in the European slow-growth Union cartel in the not so distant future. Because under European slow growth, growth much slower than world average, nothing is sustainable. Nothing. Decline keeps compounding until you cry uncle and something gives. And thank heavens it does!
In general, humanity cannot all just get along under a universal pan-world government. And, again, thank heavens for that!
Escaping from statism fled France for Canada in 2010. Unemployment is so high in France that unemployed workers are put to pasture at 45 so that they won’t appear in jobless stats.