France boosts retirement age and military spending

[cassowary]

I take back what I said about democracy being incapable of doing unpopular things for the long term good of the country.

PARIS—French President Emmanuel Macron’s government bypassed Parliament and invoked special constitutional powers on Thursday to raise the country’s retirement age, a step that places him at odds with France’s legislative branch and millions of protesters.

By requiring workers to stay on the job until they are 64 years old, rather than 62, Mr. Macron is rolling back an entitlement that lies at the heart of France’s social model. Long and cushy retirements are weighing on national finances while Mr. Macron wants to boost military spending amid the war in Ukraine.

Bypassing Parliament, which represents the democratic will of the people, was necessary to fix the fiscal problem - something the people do not want. So people have to work till 64 instead of 62 before getting their government funded pension. Not bad. Can the US reform its constitution so that the President can bypass Congress? Like Macron bypassed Parliament? Probably not.

..,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Does anybody know how much money they save from raising the retirement age vs how much additional spending on Defence? It may not make things better.

[Sertorio]

I take back what I said about democracy being incapable of doing unpopular things for the long term good of the country.

PARIS—French President Emmanuel Macron’s government bypassed Parliament and invoked special constitutional powers on Thursday to raise the country’s retirement age, a step that places him at odds with France’s legislative branch and millions of protesters.

By requiring workers to stay on the job until they are 64 years old, rather than 62, Mr. Macron is rolling back an entitlement that lies at the heart of France’s social model. Long and cushy retirements are weighing on national finances while Mr. Macron wants to boost military spending amid the war in Ukraine.

Bypassing Parliament, which represents the democratic will of the people, was necessary to fix the fiscal problem - something the people do not want. So people have to work till 64 instead of 62 before getting their government funded pension. Not bad. Can the US reform its constitution so that the President can bypass Congress? Like Macron bypassed Parliament? Probably not.

..,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Does anybody know how much money they save from raising the retirement age vs how much additional spending on Defence? It may not make things better.

It's obvious that when life expectancy is around 80, you should not retire at the age of 62. But if the French want it, let them pay for it with higher taxes. But the French legislative process is anything but democratic.

[SteveFoerster]

I take back what I said about democracy being incapable of doing unpopular things for the long term good of the country.

PARIS—French President Emmanuel Macron’s government bypassed Parliament and invoked special constitutional powers on Thursday to raise the country’s retirement age, a step that places him at odds with France’s legislative branch and millions of protesters.

By requiring workers to stay on the job until they are 64 years old, rather than 62, Mr. Macron is rolling back an entitlement that lies at the heart of France’s social model. Long and cushy retirements are weighing on national finances while Mr. Macron wants to boost military spending amid the war in Ukraine.

Bypassing Parliament, which represents the democratic will of the people, was necessary to fix the fiscal problem - something the people do not want. So people have to work till 64 instead of 62 before getting their government funded pension. Not bad. Can the US reform its constitution so that the President can bypass Congress? Like Macron bypassed Parliament? Probably not.

The president of the US bypasses Congress all the time. Remember Obama defying the Republicn-controlled Congress by saying "I have a phone and a pen"?

But this is hardly a new problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Imperial_Presidency

Does anybody know how much money they save from raising the retirement age vs how much additional spending on Defence? It may not make things better.

It probably wouldn't in the US, at least.

[neverfail]

Bypassing Parliament, which represents the democratic will of the people, was necessary to fix the fiscal problem - something the people do not want.

Sorry Cass, but that is a very simplistic and somewhat misleading description of parliamentry legislatures and how they work. Nice theory but impractical.

Once elected legislators tend to follow their own agenda (which can and often does have little or nothing to do with the prevailing opinion or mood of the public).

................................................................................................................................

On the TV news just recently I saw and heard (some them spoke in English; others had dubbed translations at bottom of screen) ordinary French people interviewed on the streets of Paris commenting on Macron's move. It was patently chear from the concensus that without exception they were only thinking about the adverse way it might affect them and not of the larger picture of the effect that not raising the retirement date would have on the solvency of the French republic.

(And if that falls so do they with it.)

Macron may have had to resort to a sly, roundabout (but not illegal) method of getting the policy enacted but I believe that the French president acted responsibly.

(Which is more than what can be said of the body of public opinion out there on the streets of Paris where they cannot think beyond the bounds of narrow self-interest; as reflected in those street interview video clips I saw.)

That in turn highlights why no truly responsible government can allow itself to become hostage to the ebb and flow of public opinion.

[cassowary]

Bypassing Parliament, which represents the democratic will of the people, was necessary to fix the fiscal problem - something the people do not want.

Sorry Cass, but that is a very simplistic and somewhat misleading description of parliamentry legislatures and how they work. Nice theory but impractical.

Once elected legislators tend to follow their own agenda (which can and often does have little or nothing to do with the prevailing opinion or mood of the public).

Their agenda is to get elected and that depends on the prevailing opinion of the electorate at the time of the election.

................................................................................................................................

On the TV news just recently I saw and heard (some them spoke in English; others had dubbed translations at bottom of screen) ordinary French people interviewed on the streets of Paris commenting on Macron's move. It was patently chear from the concensus that without exception they were only thinking about the adverse way it might affect them and not of the larger picture of the effect that not raising the retirement date would have on the solvency of the French republic.

(And if that falls so do they with it.)

Trouble is that the rabble in the streets cannot think far ahead.

Macron may have had to resort to a sly, roundabout (but not illegal) method of getting the policy enacted but I believe that the French president acted responsibly.

Yes. That's why I started this thread. Macron acted responsibly but such responsible actions are rare and thus worthy of noting.

(Which is more than what can be said of the body of public opinion out there on the streets of Paris where they cannot think beyond the bounds of narrow self-interest; as reflected in those street interview video clips I saw.)

Agreed. That's what I said.

That in turn highlights why no truly responsible government can allow itself to become hostage to the ebb and flow of public opinion.

Most of the time, politicians follow public opinion and act irresponsily. That's why most mature democracies have lots of government debt. Cutting taxes is popular. So is giving free things or suibsidies. So is lowering the retirement age. Taken together, all this result in fiscal problem and growing government debt.

On the other hand, our government which is only partially democratic has more leeway to do unpopular measures for the long term good of the country. So we have been running budget surpluses and able to save. We don't want to become a dictatorship like Xi and Putin. At the same time, we don't want to be so democratic that we end up with growing debt and I believe eventual bankruptcy or massive inflation.

Singapore is in between a typical western democracy and a outright dictatorship. I think we are at the golden mean. Because we have been able to use half the profits from accumulated savings to defray government expenditure, our taxes are kept low. As the savings grow, our taxes can keep coming down slowly.

[neverfail]

Most of the time, politicians follow public opinion and act irresponsily.

I only agree that any politican who flagrantly goes against the weight of public opinion but it does not follow from that they follow public opinion once eloected and holding the responsibility of govern.

You would probably know nothing about this living like you do in a country that has never had a change of government since independence.

[cassowary]

Most of the time, politicians follow public opinion and act irresponsily.

I only agree that any politican who flagrantly goes against the weight of public opinion but it does not follow from that they follow public opinion once eloected and holding the responsibility of govern.

You would probably know nothing about this living like you do in a country that has never had a change of government since independence.

Don’t be naive, Neverfail. Politicians want power. To get elected, they have to do and say what is popular whether or not it’s good for the people.

Yo have not lived in a country where unpopular but wise decisions were made for the long term good of the country like making English the main language at a time when the majority population was and still is Chinese.

Instead of winning popularity like all mature democracies by giving away free stuff paid for by debts, our government has spent frugally and saved money allowing the nation to build up huge reserves instead of debt.

[neverfail]

Most of the time, politicians follow public opinion and act irresponsily.

I only agree that any politican who flagrantly goes against the weight of public opinion but it does not follow from that they follow public opinion once eloected and holding the responsibility of govern.

You would probably know nothing about this living like you do in a country that has never had a change of government since independence.

Don’t be naive, Neverfail. Politicians want power.

Well of course they want power - as do we all. But not always for nefarious or egocentric reasons. You cannot get anything done without it.

Instead of winning popularity like all mature democracies by giving away free stuff paid for by debts,...

Take my word; you do not know what you are f-n-well talking about. I have deleted the "holier than thou" part or your sentence to avert further embarrasment.
...................................................................................................................................

Now, to get this discussion back on course:

While President Macron's move (as I stated above) was responsible I meant it in the fiscal/economic sense. I just realised as an afterthought that in another dimension in was a very bad decision by him.

The retirement age of 62 years has been on the statutes since 2010. When a benefit has been around for that long people tend to take it for granted that it is fixed and permanent. That represents progress and progress is supposed to be irreversable.

Macron's abrupt abolition of that right without either community consultation or giving anything back in compensation for the loss would have left French society at large with a sense of "we were robbed".

No one enjoys the feeling of having had something they value snatched away from them.

Frankly Cassowary I cannot believe that any leading French politican could be so politically inept.

Take my word, there will be plenty of recriminations to come. French society is notoriously unruly. It has been that way since the storming of the Bastille in 1789. The French have a tradition of direct acrtion going back that far. If the coming upheaval of public protest does not force Macron to back down (or resign from office) I will be very surprised.

My concern is that as a consequence of the coming upheaval Macron or his successor in office will find it politically impossible to honour France's committment of support for Ukraine.

[cassowary]

Neverfail,

It looks like you are right. The French are unruly.

[neverfail]

Neverfail,

It looks like you are right. The French are unruly.

Thanks Cass!

Well, do not lose sight of the fact that they had a revolutionary meltdown on the streets of Paris back in 1789 and an upheaval over the years and decades that followed. The effects have continued to resonate down to this day.

When a true revolutionary upheaval (as distinct from something else, like a coup, often mistaken for one) like that takes place society has to be literally reconstructed up from scratch. The legetimacy of the French state has ever since been based on a serial back reference to that catharic event. Which means that like any political entity whose legetimacy is based upon the (in my opinion, bogus) concept "the will of the people" government have to struggle to assert its authority. Sometimes that struggle proves futile.

When the French riot or go on a national strike (like has been happening in response to pension reforms for over a decade now) they are asserting "the will of the people" by direct action.

The USA is also notably a turbulent society for exactly the same reason as France. They are brother republics born of a revolutionary "impulse" of the late 18th century.