Here is an idea for a new economic indicator. The number of desperate Indians migrating to a country should be used as a measure of a country's development levels. The more the rate of migration, the more the development and vice versa.
Economics Explained has a terrible reputation among academic economists. Essentially, unless you're Australia (where he's from), your country is currently or about to fall into an economic death spiral. Ever since watching that absurd video on the UK's economy, which was full of inaccurate claims, I've been highly sceptical of every video released.
Here is an idea for a new economic indicator. The number of desperate Indians migrating to a country should be used as a measure of a country's development levels. The more the rate of migration, the more the development and vice versa.
I'm an Australian living in France with a job, wife, kids, etc. The job protections and work life balance are comforting (and sometimes even confounding) even if wages are lower. Couldn't the work/life balance and job protections be used to draw in skilled workers from less balanced economies? It is a huge reason why we continue to live here.
The rigid job protections is a double edge sword. Applying "too much" protection could stifle innovation within companies as these enterprises have little to no incentive to innovate as efficiency more often than not leads to needing less workers to produce the same output. This has created problems for youth unemployment where companies have a bias against younger workers as many companies that do pay well don't want to take risks of hiring the "wrong" worker or someone that is inexperienced. It is extremely hard to fire people in French companies even if the person is not fit for the job. Also, the birthrate problem is starting to bite France like every other European country and was partly why Macron raised the retirement age. In the most honest terms, a welfare state, despite its humane advantages is pretty much structured like a Ponzi scheme. Young workers and children are the key ingredients for such society to be viable. But a mixture of cultural and economic issues is bringing the French Social Security system to breaking point, like a slow car crash.
Bonjour! J'ai appris français et allemand, mais pour moi la France a été toujours comme une deuxième option parce que le marché de travail est très competitif. Vraiment je pense à émigrer à l'Allemagne et utiliser le français comme un plus et seulement s'il est necessaire. Est-ce que vous pensez la même chose? Je suis microbiologiste (en realité mon métier est laboratoriste clinique). Je rêve en habiter en Europe.
@@TR4R Well done on learning french! I agree in that it is competitive. Everyone is highly educated compared to Europe and imo employers tend towards highly specialized candidates rather than candidates with divers yet applicable experience. Don't really know much about German work culture, but I have a few friends that emigrated there from France to work, so you wouldn't be alone ☺️
@@TR4R comme tu parles français et allemand ça peut être intéressant d'essayer la Suisse comme ce sont les deux langues les plus utilisées dans le pays, tu auras un coût de la vie élevé mais les salaires sont vraiment beaucoup plus élevés que dans le reste de l'Europe. Sinon oui l'Allemagne me paraît plus intéressante dans ton cas que la France
France already has a lot of skilled worker and is producing a lot of high tech technology, like France is the only country in the world with the US capable of producing a nuclear aircraft carrier
I'm french and I study economics. I have never been convinced by economics explained but now they made a video on a subject I know quite well, my doubts are confirmed. It's just a stack of clichés about France that have been seen hundreds of times and as many times disproved. Where are the sources of the video in addition ?
@@Chronically_ChiII I might add, and this one I am not sure about, but I heard this "wage price spiral" isn't as common nor harmful as it seems.Nor as unstoppable. Type "wage price spiral debunked" into google and see for yourself
Yea ty, i thought exactly the same. And the last line "but now it's just getting outcompeted by places that are willing to work harder in ways that are more economically competitive" is just poorly written. This channel is from the US or GB probably, they only know ultracapitalism and judge everything with bias.
Thanks, completely agree as someone who lives in France. Also saying low unemployment is a big problem in France is just nonsense, historically France's unemployment has been higher than its peers. The whole video is a bunch of bs to be honest
@@JamalW239 He was a repressed femboy who wanted to blame society for his lack of social skills. Sure, he made some valid points about technology. But, a lot of his suffering was self-imposed.
I have spent a lot of time in France and my brother in law lives there. All I heard is “Yes I can earn more but I get more time off here”. They aren’t loosing young people. They are proud of the way they live.
France is the 2nd victim of brain drain in the world after India, they are losing young brains but attracting lazy young people, and no they don't like it, it's one of the most depressed and pessimistic countries in the world
@Zero-kd1bd the cope is coming from the people who live in countries with trash work-life balances that run people into the ground by their early 40s. You'll see, lol.
We are not losing skilled workers, we don't make them anymore. When there was enough of them, there was a national push to make them. Nowadays politics only deal with it as "if needed we will make thé job attractive for foreign skilled workers" witch don't work so well. Don't change thé french way of life, just change thé politics for thooses that don't think hospital are a cost, but an investissement for exemple.
I have a lot of respect for the French. I know this is an economics channel, but if you just examine France through the eyes of an economist, you miss a lot of what makes the country great. You touched on this tbf. They'll be fine; they have a variety of geography and climate, almost as much coast as the uk, and a huge amount of farmland. Tourism for days. And historically they've made some sensible choices on things like energy and defense.
He’s talking about productivity and relative productivity. Overall, productivity eats tourism and farmland/resources for breakfast. Just look at Russia. You can’t fake it and you can’t buy it. It’s the special sauce. It’s what made Germany, Japan and China nr. 2,3&4.
I think is a bit disingenuous to say dirigisme causes inflation in the 70-80s when every western country have the same inflation graph due to the oil crisis.
I mean in Italy it happened the same thing with basically the same approach to economy: I mean, it is true that the oil crises were the trigger, but inflation was high for nearly 20 years, even in periods where the oil price was low, ie the second half of the 80s. Now on one hand all major economies till the oil crises were in one way or another similar to France regarding the approach used, considering than since 1929 Keynesism was more or less the approach used everywhere in the west. Let’s say them at in the US and the UK the shift toward a contemporary approach to an economy was made earlier than in France or Italy (if it has been made at all 😅).
Just take what he says with grain of salt. Even is conclusion is flawed: what are the other advanced economies that does not spend beyond their means? Most do and with even more growing inequalities and decline of living standards.
Oil crises bring higher prices, not inflation. Printing money to cope with increasing prices does bring inflation. Crises are temporary, inflation is not.
Thesis of the video: economic well-being and sustainability is a function of productivity & competition Quote from the closing statement: "but now it's just getting outcompeted by places that are *willing to work harder* in ways that are more economically competitive" This odd touch of catty-ness is super unnecessary to the point where it's self-undermining. I don't use the word "objectively" often, but this is a situation where the script would have objectively worked better had someone crossed out that bit in the editing room: "but now it's just getting outcompeted by places that are that are more economically competitive" I encourage others to consider the counterfactuals; Japan's "hard" work culture which has yielded little, if any, substantial economic productivity gains. Perhaps I've gone and unfairly twisted the original intended meaning of the script... but if anything I think that underscores the problem: "working hard" is a values judgement with no concrete basis in economic science.
Oh my God you just voiced what I was thinking about you are right working hard is an economic value. I was thinking why is there so much emphasis on productivity and competition but it’s kind of interesting looking at it and seeing France also developed in Japan also developed but the work cultures are so significantly different From a guy who lives in India. This is very interesting because we are developing economy right now. so thanks a lot for voicing this. This was literally the problem I had with the video❤
I loved the off and unnecessarily part. I had to point out that living beyond their means is so quickly said pointing towards retirement, and working class. And so rarely pointed towards those such as the previously mentioned luxury brand billionaire.
I usually like your videos. I'm Australian, living in France. I have an executive role in a global company. Some interesting analysis. However, the title is apocalyptic and a number of comments are reckless generalisations and slights. In my experience of living in both, I think life can be better here than in Australia whose economy is a perpetual real estate and minerals bubble, at the mercy of the Chinese.
Economics Explained has a terrible reputation among academic economists. Essentially, unless you're Australia (where he's from), your country is currently or about to fall into an economic death spiral. Ever since watching that absurd video on the UK's economy, which was full of inaccurate claims, I've been highly sceptical of every video released
as a french I did find this video pretty bad about my country, like this video was clearly made from stereotype and not reality, we have lot of challenges but saying that our first problem is the state having too much state own companies is bad because we don't have much state own companies since 50 years at least
My favourite was when he tried to defend car-centric cities, rebutting most research with a couple of hand-wavy agruments which kinda resembled existing economic theories, but simply did not apply.
As a french I do think this video was pretty poorly researched and made out of stereotype unfortunatly.... state owned companies are not that much a thing anymore.... we have many challenges but reducing state companies is really not one of them, no one will agree with you here
Not to mention, in comparison to other countries, I wonder how France compares to the US. Point-in-fact the largest employer in the US: the federal government.
Comme d'hab lorsqu'un anglo-saxon parle de notre économie. Il a quand même réduit notre economie à faire des sacs trop chère avec un peuple de fainéants qui vit sur ses acquis 😂
An excellent example of the french national industries is covered in youtuber Perun's episode on French military procurement. Despite not being a super power, France manages to field equipment that is only reserved to actual super powers such as aircraft carriers, nuclear subs, nuclear weapons, it's own fighter aircraft, tanks, artillery, vehicles and more.
@@imperator31Does that mean the country making all its own military equipment, the gov't doing if instead of the private sector, or something else entirely? I've watched Perun's excellent piece, but I generally know more about the German economy than the French one (at least as far as European economies go)
De gaule basically say the world needs something else than USA or Russia in term of power they need something in the middle that why India will try to buy weapon from us and why Australia was stopped from buy French weapons. Now with Russia weapons proved to be some kind of a joke in that Ukraine war France will or should experience a growth in its relative importance due to a growth of military exports
I have to admit, they have a pretty impressive version of silicon valley. They have a lot of good software developers and a strong creative gaming industry.
According to the video, the major problem is state funded company. But the funded state companies represents only 3,1% of the employment in France. All along, there is almost no numbers given to put the content into perspective...
Pretty sure the numbers for overall public employment are much higher. Public-sector employees work less (produce less) per person and get paid more, exerting upward pressure on inflation.
I think your arrangement of the flight of the Huguenots and the French Revolution(s) implies a conflation between the two. The bulk of Huguenots left France in 1685, more than 100 years before the French Revolution 1789, and long before France's industrial revolution in the 1830s. While the loss of the Huguenots represented a serious loss of human capital of France, none of them would have been the engineers, scientists, or specialists critical to the French industrial revolution by virtue of predating it by so much. Otherwise a very informative and intriguing video. Thank you very much!
But that's the thing. The industrial revolution began in the 18th century. Steam power allowed for substantial advancement, yes, but water-powered factories had been around long before then. Indeed, the reason for the first engines was to expand the capacity and reliability of *existing* coal mines. By 1830, the UK was already considering railroads and steamships. The mills and metalworks were already huge. They had to import coal and iron because they couldn't mine it fast enough. France had the potential for all that, *and more.*
@@watchm4ker it's also worth noting that the UK already had canals and railroads in the 17th century. It's funny to think about, but the UK and Germany both had railways long before trains had been invented! So even before steam engines, as you say, there were already significant increases in coal output, iron output, textiles output and fertiliser outputs that set the stage for a true industrial revolution. And French hugenots did end up contributing greatly to the development of the UK's financial institutions and a few industries like silk weaving, wine making and cultery manufacturing
Yes, but the point is those who left went with the skills and innovation for the next generations. Like he said, the Industrial revolution didn't happen overnight. In Britain, before railways we had canals and before cotton factories we had small scale textile makers. While we were producing skilled engineers and innovating using steam, the French were contemplating philosophy :)
I think it would be interesting to compare Scandinavian countries, which also have very strong welfare systems and France and see what they are potenially doing better/worse than each other and where they could learn from each other. Naturally you often hear economists to demand to cut down on the social security and welfare systems to solve economic problems but i'm not sure if this is always the best solution. Also i think it would be nice to include a few more statistics to emphasize where exactly the problems of certain economies lie and in which way economic measures are hoping to change those.
Quite simply; Norway is the sole country with a long-term sustainable welfare system, and that's only because of the disproportionate sovereign fund they amassed by hitting the natural resource lottery. Sweeden and Denmark both have a higher % of the population below the poverty line compared to France specifically, and higher even % at risk of falling below. Systemic changes are necessary, whether they'll happen naturally (progressive automatization due to rise of AI & other technologies) or by forced policy (and how?) is the actual question that merits a discussion.
Sweden is a particularly interesting example because of the way that the welfare state has been used to create an extremely entrepreneurial culture. They have one of the highest rates of new start-ups in the world, and there are more unicorns in Stokholm than anywhere except Silicon Valley, and a bit part of the reason is the welfare state being designed to encourage it while ensuring that people are confident about being ok should things fall through. Of course, at the same time, the Swedish krona has historically been all over the place as a currency which suggests something quite serious going on under the surface of the Swedish economy.
The most terrible thing happening to France is our public service going downhill even though there are so much taxes. The money is just not going where it should. It saddens me even more as an economist that attended a public university...
It is more a political problem that an economic one and I think it involves the higher echelons of those sectors. A good scrubing of the public sector is in order.
@@6visages954 i meant that some public services are just a waste of money that could be spent elsewhere (other public services that actually serve a purpose, reducing our ridiculous debt to GDP ratio or smth)
@@mattman3960 yeah sure, maybe. To be honest I don’t know enough to have a strong point of view on this topic. What I know tho it’s we are bless to have acces to a lots of publics services, education(from kindergarden to college), health mental, health, or retirement... And I truely belive it’s important to preserve it. But lots and LOTS of money are not going where it should. I am talking about frauds from inside and outside the gouvernement. Or people just straight up robing. People that abuse of the systeme because we are more and more paranoid (I talked to a doctor and she told that more and more people where going to the hospital for things that could be handle by doctor or people going to the doctor for nothing). I also belive that a lots of money is waisted on jobs that doesn’t deed to exist while others jobs that are very important are neglicted. I sure did forget to say other very important things. But in the end I think we should be more see through on where the money is spent and where it’s invested. And also doing a great good clean up.
The video says that inflation and dirigism were at their peak in the '80s. What I see is a peak around the oil crises of 1974 and 1979 - exactly as happened in the US, where dirigism wasn't a factor. How did inflation in France compare to that in the US?
@@MissBabalu102 Basically it means the state intervenes a lot in the private sector because it doesn’t trust the market ability to regulate itself while still maintaining the interests of the consumers, employees and small businesses.
I agree for health and education, but not energy. It's not perfect, but I'm pretty optimistic for the energy side in the long term as France is among the few that kept their Nuclear capabilities.
Comme tous les pays occidentaux car ils sont dirigé par des politiciens corrompus qui servent l'agenda du forum économique mondial et autres organisations globalistes pour asservir le peuple petit à petit.
try experiencing healthcare, education, and energy in the US. Every country is under pressure, some more than most. Its relative and I believe the french should be proud that their system appears to be falling a lot less than most. Kinda stupid thing to say but its what I think outside looking in. Most french would feel like living in the US is farrr worse, unless they have a high paying tech job which is what the US is about, modern day feudalism where the rich experience a good life and the rest toil in the mud
'Some fringe economists' being the most influential economists of the last 100 years ... This channel never fails to impress with the ignorance of the writers.
All the services he mentioned could also be easily transactable through insurance companies because they are essentially insurance services. I swear to god it's like everyone who talks about economy instantly forget about insurance services.
I'm french living in France. This video is so funny. They defintly don't know what they are talking about, finding another scapegoat for artificially created inflation in any occidental country. And soon CBDCs, people ... (well, if we don't have a civil war until then)
I watched a recent video on this channel about the UK. It was broadly positive and gave the UK a pleasingly rosey future. I love in the UK. None of what the video presented tallied with my lived experience. I travel around France regularly. I wish my country was more like France. I'm not an economist but I know what I like.
As an Englishman with a french partner, who regularly visits and has lived in both, France is significantly worse than the UK in almost every way except climate and food
I am a frenchman, I haven't watched the video yet, and seeing the title, I say to myself : "What is so terrible ? It's just monday." Edit : I wached the video, and yeah, it's just monday. Nothing unusual.
People try to predict the economy not realizing it is not a capitalistic market, its a command economy, central planning! my concern is, instead of having much dollar in bank that could lose value to inflation, do I save in gold to reserve and grow wealth for now, or just hang on?
Sure, investing is plain-sailing with the aid of an invt-specialist, thus I've always delegated my excesses ever since the rona-outbreak in January 2020 using a shrewd advisor, and my investments have compounded by at least 300%, summing up $820k ROI as of today.
Certainly, there are a handful of experts in the field. I've experimented with a few over the past years, but I've stuck with ‘’AILEEN GERTRUDE TIPPY” for about five years now, and her performance has been consistently impressive.She’s quite known in her field, look-her up.
Thank you for this tip. It was easy to find your coach. Did my due diligence on her before scheduling a phone call with her. She seems proficient considering her resume.
Capitalism doesn’t exist on earth right now. We have corporatism and lobbying. If there are any restrictions it’s not free enterprise, if they print money not backed by the gold standard and lobby government workers to gain soecial treatment it’s not true capitalism. That’s corporatism and how we have companies larger than nations now.
French here. Our system is not effective at all, and we have a deep problem with this effectiveness… That made that yes from a small company economy, we went to a big company economy. We don’t have enough small businesses. Every market has its own kind of “monopoly company” that control sometimes over 50% of the market shares. Just because at the end, if you want to create your business you have one of the highest tax rates in the world…
The assumption that private companies will always try to reduce their costs is questionable. The people running these companies may have motives other than increasing profitability like paying their board members as much as possible or satisfying the empire-building megalomania of certain executives. Where there is less than perfect competition this will often be the case.
Good thing about private companies, they will get outcompeted by other private companies and collapse if they keep doing that. Unlike a state enterprise, it will fail without affecting the government or wasting tax payer money. That's one of the main advantages of (capitalism) private enterprises over state sponsored ones, it doesn't matter if some or many of them fail.
@@budawang77 Didn't he say just that? What are you even disputing then? And although rare there is still a way to make companies (who are monpolies or duopolies) competitive. By laws or by breaking them into smaller companies. In a state enterprise there is no such option and the people who will lose employment if the enterprise collapses will keep political pressure on the government to let the inefficient companies running which means more waste of taxes.
@@HemantKumar-id3jg Every economist will tell you that perfect competition is a theoretical myth. A LOT of industries are highly concentrated. And no, before you say it, that's not just due to the govt.
I wonder how punitive it is for small businesses to start and hire workers in France? Things like paid maternity leave, unemployment insurance, on the job injury insurance. It seems quit expensive for a small business to hire people here in Canada. What effects does that have on the over all economy of a country?
So odd that the economic system penalizes a nation for taking care of its people. Does the lack of healthcare in the US lead to jobs being lost in Canada and France? The world may be connected sometimes in unkind ways.
punitive measures almost never work- just like youre in a bad place if your government has to save you from absolute death and homelessness- an economy simply cant run on debt forever. i think thats the pit fall- were obsessed with paying back- but paying back a debt actually has no value. banning late fees- seems like the obvious for instance- as its punitive and only works to reduce productivity. you turn a literate skilled human into a vagrant drain on the safety net. but we need to replace that gate with something less about debt and more about value. the ubi plus some debt forgiveness kickback for people under stressful collapsing personal finances a cap on profit margin that taxes beyond 300% or so of relevant inputs- and gives credit to those that comply or over adjust in favor of their workers- this credit can unlock a privilege they may seek like land development- less costs for things like permits yada yada. you know a positive flow rule set- that encourages them to do valuable things on their own. essentially you could still run the business like usual- you can cut costs, become more efficient lay off workers all thats stuff- but youll only grow if you developed a healthy workforce and showed some social responsibility as a company. im sure theres plenty of like this stuff in law all around the world- but i dont think we considered how its merely punitive measures messing us up. if youre always repairing a window- youre not making another one. this is true economically socially and politically.
Well I'm from France and for what it's worth I can say that 200 of my colleagues got laid off at my old work because their jobs were moved over to Portugal where minimum wage is half that of France and there's much much less corporate tax. Since both Portugal and France are in the EU, they still have access to the exact same free market without any drawbacks for doing this to lower costs.
@@daniellarson3068 There is nothing odd about the fact that encouraging people not to work as long leads to less production, even in socialism, communism or whatever system you use, it will always be a fact that less people working and less hours worked means less production. Until robots fully replace humanity, it will stay like that, and even then there are signs that the general population, technologically illiterate as it is, is unable to understand that robots aren't people, so you can bet they'll end up giving them weekend breaks or something. Edit : Having good healthcare coverage is not bad for production unless it is so generous and lenient you are better off sick and insane work hours actually can result in less production. It's all in the balance, a thing France is lacking currently.
I've heard stuff about France that seems particularly rigid and burdensome. Businesses have to think thoroughly before hiring because laying off afterward isn't so easy.
Some corrections: inflation in France was never driven by a lower-than-optimum unemployment. French unemployment has historically been higher than its comparable Western European counterparts (UK, Germany). Conversely, French productivity is also higher than that of those comparable countries. Whereas the brain drain in France is lower than in the UK or in the Netherlands, and barely higher than Germany or the US.
productivity per worked hour because in france people only actually work during working hour. no coffee/cigarette break for almost every job. but french people work about only 40h a week (35 for public servants, that's very low in comparision to usa, japan or china. in china 54h a week is very common)
When you say "countries that are willing to work harder," I hear "in countries where the powerful exploit the workers more." I didn't know much about French economics before the video, and don't know much now, but one thing is true: it's not France that has a problem, it's the rest of the world.
It so happens that I am French and I have a similar take. It is not so much that strong worker protections and services as well as dirigisme are "beyond our means" in and of themselves. After all, those were financially viable for decades and were far more developed at the time than they are now (with some inefficiencies for sure, but also great benefits). It is that, with globalisation, France came to compete with countries who would rather give the share of GDP spent on those to the rich instead. Before that, economic participants of the French economy more or less had to comply with whatever worker rights were voted in and that was it. Now they can relocate to avoid the cost, hence inducing a race to the bottom. There is no such thing as "the French economy" anymore. It is the global economy. Only in that sense is France living beyond its means. As I see it, what is happening in France is just part of a general global trend of fewer rich people getting even richer and an increasingly high number of poorer people getting squeezed even harder. France is only special in that it had better worker benefits so it is falling from a much higher place.
Yes, this. Capitalism doesn't need to be inhumane. It doesn't need to be rapacious. But the few at the top promote the all-or-nothing belief so they can perpetuate their own sociopathy.@@MrSupergigamoi
@@MrSupergigamoi correct but globalization is coming to an end, and in this new future, France will actually have it a lot better than most other countries.
I think your title should have read ‘la vie en rose is over’; cest La vie is a sort of shoulder shrug that’s said after something unfortunate happens. It’s a literal translation of ‘that’s life’ and is used the same. Something you’d say after you loose a wallet or your bicycle is stolen kinda thing. ‘La vie en rose’ on the other hand is sort of analogous to ‘looking at life through rose colored glasses’ although not exactly the same.
The wage price inflation is a boogeyman used to reduce wages (relative to inflation). Over the years, the proportion of people earning close to minimum wage is increasing. It wouldn't surprise me that a country like Poland or Hungary will have higher wages than France in less than 20 years. The other problems are basic liberalism: lower taxes to the rich, increase taxes for everybody else, the government is hemorrhaging money by cutting its tax revenue, oligopolies are stagnating wages, public workers are getting wage cuts and their benefits are slashed, privatization of public services etc... An advanced state of this trend would be mirrored in the USA.
The proportion of people earning close to minimum wage is increasing because as minimum wage increases, those who would once be making a middle class wage are now making closer to what a burger flipper makes. The higher minimum wage gets, the more the middle class suffers and is dragged down by rising tides.
The concept of a wage price spiral, presented here as fact, is far from being so. Even the Cato Institute (Libertarian) says it's bunk. "The idea that wage‐price spirals cause inflation - that higher prices lead to higher wage demands, which beget further higher prices and then higher wages again and again - is a long‐standing myth, and a dangerous one given it can lead to such misguided policy."
I'm Italian living in France, I have seen your video on the end of Dolce Vita, now France is falling apart... Is the fiesta over for Spain too? Is Germany up Schnitzel creek? Is it nevermore for the Netherlands? I am mocking gently because I find your videos well made but I think your titles are too over dramatic and fear mongering. Yes Europe is in a Sea Change in terms of Demographics and Economics but if civilisation has taught us anything it's that we will adapt. I agree with the comments about France's over taxation and the need to modernise and streamline the bureaucracy, the real flaw at the moment is that the three main political parties are all populists who actually need the very problems they claim to want to solve in order to exist as a valid political entity, otherwise they may actually have to do some real work in improving infrastructure and services.
Is Frances economy really stagnating that much? I think it's dangerous to constantly think about improving the economy because if you focus on this then you end up with a country like the USA. Sure, it's economy is great but people have 10 days off work a year. Sometimes governments (and economists) forget what the real objective is, and that is to optimise the well-being of its citizens. If that means a productive economy then great, but not at the expense of its citizens' well-being.
Basically, the govt has been ensuring a healthy lifestyle and work/life balance for its people for decades but EU and Global companies dont like what they are doing there because it will slightly eat into their profits and France is deciding to up lift and change their economy at the expense of workers and society.
After a certain point, what would happen if workers were given equity instead of higher wages? Would this prevent a wage price spiral? What if workers demanded better technology instead of higher wages? (And that improved productivity) What if workers negotiated increased occupancy health and safety standards instead of higher wages? (That might reduce the usage of paid ‘sick leave’ days off)
@@FaustsKanaal that’s a good point. Having equity where you work puts you in a different position than just an employee shouting for a pay rise. This is especially true if the equity comes with full voting rights and the ability for you to pass on your equity in your will. Imagine wanting a company to cut staff expenses (and numbers) so that your shares increase in value, but at the same time wanting to keep your job and wanting your workmates to keep their job. Imagine how you would feel about people taking sick leave when they’re not sick. The culture would change to much more of a team culture.
The new largest companies like Google, Apple, Intel, Microsoft, are global and US has the benefit of a large home market and outside US most people know English so they can easily expand. France has a smaller home market and French is less used, of course many learn English but it is still a hindrance I think.
France will come out on top when globalization hits full reverse mode, protectionism comes back, and all of a sudden everyone must depend on their own industry/resources/strengths in all fields to get by. You forgot to mention one very important thing: France is almost self-sufficient in food, most heavy industry, and electricity production.
It would be good to hear your views on the tradeoff between national competitiveness and standards of living. Why is it such a bad thing to have a lower level of productivity if the standard of living is higher than other economies? And over the long term?
I feel like the long term issue is that it's a fragile system where things need to go right to sustain the social nets. Plus if everyone is in a mindset that their needs are taken care of I can see how on surface level folks won't try to push for innovation.
Productivity is income _per hour worked._ It is impossible to have a good standard of living without good productivity (unless hunting-gathering is your idea of a good life).
@@alphamikeomega5728 However, working less is also good for productivity and having a vegetable garden (gathering), not needing childcare, in addition to being profitable for a household, is also profitable for France which would not have need to spend on care, sick leave, daycare, there are many more advantages than one would think, especially if from a capitalist point of view. There's no point working 50 hours a week, if it means that the French spend all the money on trips abroad, iPhones, Tesla, Amazons, etc. What destroyed the French economy is excessive capitalism protected by the government, Europe and the ability to always postpone what should have been done a long time ago and now it is much more expensive than 20 years ago, that's good we no longer have the money and technical means...
Globalization has pretty much made your wish impossible. Competitiveness on the global market is important to sustain the standard of living that you are talking about. You simply can't have your cake and eat it too. (It's also likely that the French sustained a high standard of living by feeding off the colonies in the past). The glory days are gone.
Another thing to consider is that if a government owned company is inefficient is a detriment to the taxpayer because it doesn’t exist in a vacuum. The resources have a cost of opportunity to be used elsewhere by government to provide other goods to its citizens. Tax money is not infinite as politicians think it is and there’s only so much debt a country can sustain.
Not only that but a government owned company makes it almost impossible for actual businesses to survive in a particular industry (cannot compete with an entity that cannot go bankrupt / is heavily subsidized or hogs all resources (airport slots or tracks).
Around 13:30 Germany in its economic boom had what's called full employment. Nobody argues that this was bad. Nor was there hyperinflation. So why are you arguing that full employment causes it?
He provided a caveat that you may have missed. Full employment causes inflation if the productivity of workers is outstripped by their demand in wages, while also providing no alternative to employers. It's simply the case that the economic boom in Germany gave them more leeway to hire more people without having an inflationary effect.
@@D4PPZ456 shouldn't any highly developed economy then still not need to fear the effects of full employment? In Germany today if you look at the population without the migrants they too have almost full employment? So you're telling me that those migrants nowadays who are in welfare are saving Germany from massive maybe hyperinflation. Infact if they were to get a job it might be extremely dangerous to the German Economy? That is absolut rubbish. If people make new wealth in a job. It is better for the economy than if they were unemployed. If there is almost no unemployment and wages rise it will lead to a better allocation of labour as if there are more jobs than workers it should lead to better allocation of labor into the more productive and better compensated jobs. If there are always unemployed than there will not be the redistribution to more productive roles at the same scale. So in fact I believe that full employment strengths some of the strongest market forces!
A small note on hiring in government vs. private enterprise: managers in large corporations are often incentivized to hire and retain excess personnel in order to inflate their department's budget, or their ego (higher number of direct reports).
This....seems to be something that would eventually hurt competitiveness of that firm? Not to mention, many government positions are literally sinecures given for backing the winning horse, hence why so many of them could be cut temporarily during covid with no effect to government services (look up how much of the DOE essentially didn't work during lockdown).
I think you’re right that to a certain extent managers in large corporations do act this way, but if you’re implying that this somehow creates more bloat than governmental organizations, that’s where I’d have to disagree. You can only bloat your department so much in a corporation before you have a down year and then layoff 20% of your staff
If you look at KPIs of government workers/departments, they're often 20-30% of private enterprises. The government loves building complex systems (it's a bureaucracy) which don't help the workers to get things done efficiently... for the same amount of output, even a large inefficient private enterprise would probably only need 1/3rd the amount of employees - and it would pay them better. But you do need government to keep large enterprises from becoming natural monopolies. Occasionally a tiny company develops ways to be disruptively more efficient. They can't flourish without the shade from the big guys being pared back a bit...
Often the less skilled worker is less productive or they are older or very young. But that does not mean that they are unemployable. It means that they will seek entry level or semi-skilled labor work that may be part time or seasonal to augment full time permanent workers during business peak cycle times. They will usually get less pay, and they will save less of their wages because there is usually a minimum cost of living associated with housing, transportation and food in any place of business/city. France can have that system too, where there are more job openings, but the skill level is less and the pay is less. What is bad is when a person has been at a company three years, and has only received their annual cost of living raises but knows a lot more about the company and their job than new hires that can often be hired at a much higher initial starting pay than the person that was there for three years and may be effectively training them and making in some cases the same pay. There is no incentive to work for a company any longer than to learn skills and then sell those skills to their competitor if the company is not willing to train, and improve them and pay them more. That was often the case in Software.
The whole concept of perpetual growth is entirely unsustainable. If increased personal wellbeing isn't the ultimate goal of a society, then what is? GDP growth at the expense of the worker inevitably leads to inequality and instability.
The comments show that within a globalized world, it’s more possible than ever to choose an economy that suits your own ethos for what is a good life. Being from the UK I’ve always preferred the European culture of working to live rather than vice versa but I probably wouldn’t think like this without access to basic needs like healthcare, food and housing. Still seems weird though that people chase wealth endlessly once you’ve accumulated more than you need, having time to swim in the med and visit the mountains seems more valuable than figures in a bank
As a Brit having lived in France for the past 18 years, I can honestly say that life here is way better than across the Channel in Broken Brexit Britain.
The problem with standard economic theory of inflation is so much of standard economics is mathematically and behaviorally false. Because theory is like theory of lunar cheese variety, it’s solution policy is just not in touch with reality.
5:42 "while human labor in other industrial economies was thrown into the literal meat grinder of early industry" The correct word it figurative. It would be really gross and counter productive to throw human labor into a literal meat grinder.
Frenches enjoy their life and love their lifestyle. Ask them that they would like to live like Americans, German or Japanese. They will say no without hesitation. So France does not need to change.
@@kingofhearts3185 Relying on the pension Ponzi scheme is a mistake. Also money doesn't mean wealth, but the accessible goods and services mean wealth, because you can have all the money in the world on a lonely island, you ain't wealthy in that case. Work and life balance is important, since time is worth more than an inflating currency. Making everyone running harder in the hamster wheel may look like better economic output, but the price is that the workers can't enjoy life that much anymore, because they have less time to do so and everyone burns out faster.
@@Ningen18 And you still need money to have all of that. It's a means to an end, not the end itself. But you can't get there without means. What good is time if you're in poverty?
@@kingofhearts3185 That's why work and life balance is important. Poverty is when you can't provide value or when you can't barter that value to someone else's value. Working and spending your salary is just a way to exchange your precious time to somone else's precious time. The currency is just a lubricant. Also note that money is not the same as currency, because money keeps the value of your labor, while the inflating currency does not.
@@Ningen18 Is that meant as a critique or an elaboration? I don't think anything you said is wrong, I just don't see how it's meant to disprove my point.
"C'est la vie is over" makes absolutely no sense. It's not the same as dolce vita, they know that, right..? Have thy even bothered to Google what it means?
Interesting thought. The point about having competition increases the chance of innovation which increases technology and profits. The opposite would be government run which may stagnation in advancements because they really don't have competition to be more profitable. There is the phenomenon where healthcare in the US is a private industry and although there is some competition, consumers are gauged like never before. Maybe this can be caulked up to corruption or profiting on someone's emergency (extortion).
@@ryanf6530 id agree with you if you were talking about any other advanced economy but the french one. The only thing to learn from the french model is how not to do it.
Disappointing to see the “Wage Price Spiral” such prominence, when it is such a rare occurrence in the last 40 years. In competitive markets, those basket workers getting an extra 50c would put pressure on a) the profit margins b) executive compensation and c) the drive to innovate and automate, just as much as it would place pressure on prices
He didn't talk about it because it's happened a lot in the last forty years. He talked about it because it happened a lot prior to that, and countries including France have avoided wage-hiking policies because they know it will happen again. It's not a question that it happens. It's one of the most repetitive phenomena in economics. The question is, and has been, how to create growth without triggering it, and France is bad at it because of how they organize their institutions.
@@ideologybot4592 To qualify as "the most repetitive phenomena in economics" it would really want to be happening regularly in the last four decades, no? I think it is most likely to occur when labour is a substantial portion of overall costs, and wage increases would have heavy pressure on prices. Labour becomes a smaller portion of costs in an economy as it industrialises and modernises, so I don't think it's surprising that it was a big issue in the past but not such a big issue now.
@@ptanham Even in an industrial economy, the majority of major businesses have labor as their biggest expense if you look deep enough. Even if you look at something like a restaurant where labor isn't the biggest line item cost, the biggest item is food and the biggest cost for a food supplier will be processing and that comes back to labor. If you have something like a logistics company, they have to pay for equipment and maintenance which they can contract, but contracting is still a mostly-labor expense. They pay for people and diesel, that's basically it. The only expenses that don't come back to labor in some way are energy and various types of monopolistic rents. So labor is still the overwhelmingly important cost for nearly everything, and the link between increasing labor costs and inflation has given some modern economists reason to look back at the Phillips curve. It's not a secret that, in America particularly, wages have stagnated since the mid-1970's while inflation has been controlled since not long after. This isn't an accident. We've been managing a fundamental truth of economics well and paying the price in having a stagnating middle and working class. That doesn't mean the principle ceases to exist.
I moved to France, love it here, have a much better quality of life and can experience so much more ( vacations close to home tourism, culture...) on a yearly income ghat would put me below poverty line in ghe USA. I own a house and large enough garden (to ot waste all my free time on it, enought to garden and hang out. 800m2) in a coasral town known for it’s history and dynamic sports and cultural life.
and what do you do for living? France, like many European countries has a very centralized economy with all the juiciest jobs in Paris. Outside Paris, without a strong inherited capital like a house you are basically cooked. If you came to France with half a million dollars yes, life is beautiful. If you instead found a job there with less than 50K gross/year, you are cooked.
Given the persisting global economic crisis, it's essential for individuals to focus on diversifying their income streams independent of governmental reliance. This involves exploring options such as stocks, gold, silver, and digital currencies. Despite the adversity in the economy, now is an opportune moment to contemplate these investment avenues.
People believe their currency has the worth it does because they have no other option. Even in a hyper-inflationary environment, individuals must continue to use their hyperinflationary currency since they likely have minimal access to other currencies or gold/silver coins.
Inflation is gradually going to become part of us and due to that fact any money you keep in cash or in a low-interest account declines in value each year. Investing is the only way to make your money grow and unless you have an exceptionally high income, investing is the only way most people will ever have enough money to retire.
I agree, that's the more reason I prefer my day to day investment decisions being guided by an advisor, seeing that their entire skillset is built around going long and short at the same time both employing risk for its asymmetrical upside and laying off risk as a hedge against the inevitable downward turns, coupled with the exclusive information/analysis they have, it's near impossible to not out-perform, been using my advisor for over 2years+ and I've netted over 2.8million.
Interesting Josh. I think this is something I should do, but I've been stalling for a long time now. I don't really know which firm to work with; I feel they are all the same but it seems you’ve got it all worked out with the firm you work with so i surely wouldn’t mind a recommendation.
Colleen has the appearance of being a great authority in her profession. I looked her up online and found her website, which I reviewed and went through to learn more about her credentials, academic background, and employment. She has a fiduciary duty to protect my best interests. I sent her an email outlining my objectives and also booked a session with her; thanks for sharing.
The frenches are totally right in putting thr people above the profit. In Italy we have salaries stuck to 2000 level and prices are far higher than in France.I often go to France for leisure, they have lower prices than Italy,,,and far higher wages
I'm currently living and working in France. I've been here all my life and this video is just overboard. Sure like all countries we have problems but compared to the UK we're living in luxury.
The theory expounded in the video is not necessarily pertaining to France alone, but a lot of other countries. It is, in fact, general consensus among people who have studied Economics. France is just one country which is grappling with the consequences among many others.
You missed one good 3rd option at the end, France could also shift the tax burdon more towards wealth tax on multimillionairs and reduce (or at least don't increase) income tax.
one thing alot of people dont talk about with the fine edge between profit and nonprofit in companies is the amount that CEO, shareholders and high salary effect on the margines. im sure that most companies could cap their payceeling at 100k euros a month and be more profitable. greed is the number one destroyer in the market.
I feel like this video implies so many problems, but does not really show hard data for the claimed problems. Maybe one or two concrete examples of some state enterprises and how they’re not optimally using resources would have been nice. Also the historic claims seem too vague and not grounded on proper historical analysis, but I may be corrected on those.
You're analysis of labor, miss the role of capital. You assume no changes in the profit of capital. France has increased the rate and profit of its biggest companies over the past years has grew exponentially. So basically more and more of the added value is given to capital (which only a tiny amount is reinvested in the economy) and relatively less to labour. Highering wages by taking on capital profit, would not lead to inflation.
Per MMT, sovereign currency states fund themselves via deficit. Gov spending grows money supply (credit). Countries in the EU kinda can’t quite the same way the US , UK, Japan or China can.
France has been around for 1500 years and has survived many crisis through its history, while being the nation who brought the most innovations to the modern world. Still today its quality is unmatched in areas like aeronautics, TGV s, ship building ...and .military equipment not to mention culture , history, gastronomy... So I would not worry too much about France future.
The thing is that the other advanced economies that you are mentioning are also living beyond their means (the US, the UK, other European countries or even some south American and Asian countries) and many of them more than France lol Therefore are they much better? Some of them have even more insane budget deficit that just fuels more inequality and transfer of wealth to the rich.
The recession wouldn’t be that had on us if only most people took out their time and finance to venture into investment opportunities, most people live in comfort of savings which won’t cover up for much on this recession
Would be interesting to overlay how a shared currency (across borders with very different countries),impacts the economy and the economic actions a country can take.
seems like even British people forget. It is properly called "The British Industrial Revolution", for a reason. All others followed on. Took the British 200 years to accomplish this. Took America 70 years and the Chinese about 50. Always easier when you have a blueprint.
NAIRU + Unemployment being Human Misery in all measurable domains (health, wealth, child upbrining, etc.) = Economists think some (millions of people) have to suffer for capitalism to work well (which means for the rich to cumulate more wealth); "other countries are willing to work harder" ... the countries being those were workers have no social, civil and often even basically human rights? Why coulnd't France tax wealth (not income, wealth) to support the system? Why is it the workers that have to pay the toll and not the rich?
cause the rich just relocate to a new country that doesnt tax the rich. That is exactly what france tried to do with it 70% tax on the rich when Hollande was president. they all just left
This is precisely not the answer, neither for the rich or the middle-class. The primary metrics for consideration are healthy competition and increasing worker productivity. You don't want to do anything that would lead to brain drain or reduced capital investment in your nation or these two key metrics will be on the decline, along with the general quality of life. The ideal scenario seems to be full employment without inflated wages and prices. A market of competitively priced goods where demand for goods and the labour to make it are high seem like the best of both worlds, as the purchasing power of wages will adjust to whatever the nominal value of their wages are while allowing the worker to benefit from the increased competitiveness of their nation.
Because every single country that's tried has seen capital flight and brain drain in unprecedented scale. Including France itself during Hollande. And no, the countries that benefit the most from that sort of thing do have human and civil rights, often moreso than a country whose State apparatus has grown to the size necessary for wealth taxation to work-countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom were the main beneficiaries of Hollande's screw up, not Chad or Congo. Much like in America it was Chile and Panama that benefitted from it during Venezuela's Chávez, not Nicaragua. The problem with your analysis is that you see the economy as only two big blocks: "workers" and "the rich", and thus believe anything that positively impacts unskilled workers cannot also negatively impact skilled workers, or viceversa. And no, economies cannot sustain themselves on unskilled workers alone, that's the whole danger of brain drain.
Why does higher wages equal bad economy? The wage based inflation argument is absent any critique of the capital class. Why should only the workers lose money? Why cant the capital class just make LESS profits? Companies don't NEED to hire more employees. They dont NEED to expand. You are assuming perpetual growth is the only acceptable outcome while arguing for inefficiencies in public services. Does not compute
It doesn't. Lots of high wage countries have good economies. However less productivity per worker equals bad economy. The main issue that France has is that people are demanding more goods and services than their economy can produce (due to aging workforce, government intervention, etc). Because their economy is less productive (for a variety of reasons), the supply can't keep up with demand, which causes inflation. You can't just force people to demand less good and services, because they'll complain that their quality of life is going down, and you can't force people to produce more goods and services, because they aren't slaves and they have the option of leaving to a country that's more productive and can pay them more.
Also more economic output doesn't mean a better life. YOU have brought up that chart several times about how past a certain dollar amount your life doesn't really change. Maybe the message should be that we have done to much in the economy and just need to hold things stable until a new technology comes along that needs us to keep pushing.
The UK voted to leave the EU in 2016. Since then investment, especially Foreign Direct Investment and exports have plummeted. No surprise there. But last year it overtook France to become the world’s seventh largest exporter of manufactured goods. How is that possible?
Interesting - So last week I thought of the Tour De France. I figured bicycling must be very popular in France. It has a gentle climate and a beautiful countryside. My next assumption was that bicycle manufacturing must be rather extensive in such a country. Your video of French artisans being prolific in France would also lead credibility to their being many who craft fine bicycles. My brief internet search showed that there used to be a lot of French bicycle manufacturers. However, they have either left to manufacture elsewhere or closed down their shops. Does this exemplify what was discussed in this video? Was my search wrong?
Nowadays production happens wherever it's cheapest and easiest, which is different than where cycling is popular. Seems like countries like Cambodia, Vietnam and Portugal are among the top exporting countries and I doubt cycling is wide spread there.
@@dazzlebreak4458 It seemed like there were still a lot of small bicycle manufacturers in Italy too for some reason. You are right that bicycles are a commodity product that can be made where lower priced labor will be available. So, I suppose the pay is better in France.
17:45 I am from Greece , a country that was notoriously living beyond it's means (in a different way) before the 2008 financial crysis ... We have learned from the mistakes of the past throiugh a painful decade of economic crysis (2009-2019) and now we are improving rapidly, after having gone through some unpopular but necessary radical reforms The situation in France is very different but is equally unsustainable to pre-2008 Greece ... I just hope that the reforms Macron is implementing are enough to avoid a huge crash, because the way I see it , they are just a bandaid compared to what needs to be done , slowing down instead of fixing the problem ... and seeing the insane reactions of the people for even the tiniest of these necessary reforms (which remind me of our anti-austerity movement and the massive protests for the necessary but painful reforms we had to make ) , doesnt give me enough confidence At least France is trying to change course before the big crash , which is a lot more than Greece was doing pre-2008, which was to pretend there was no problem and only start to make the painful changes when we were already down , which is why our crysis lasted as long as it did
Their real problem is no how much time they have off. It's declining birthrate. The loss of future workers is why they can't pay those generous pensions.
I took the train in England… I saw Last Week Tonight on the train situation in the US… Those were far worst situation than what an own state situation did… capitalism leading to monopoly and profit going to shareolders before consumers is not working that well…
Privatization and removing vertical integration is what is causing SNCF to be anything but a laughing stock. Explain to me how having sub contracts is cheaper than just hiring the labor directly ?
@@gamingyann1769 thats a good point. But as the video said. The French state create companies on key sectors. Now, that there is a rail infrastructure, they should open the gates for other companies, as they did in many other countries. I should look up more information about the USA situation, the lobbying is strong in this one. Thats one of the key weaknesses of our occidental democracies.
I grew up in France. The SNCF train system had downsides (mostly politically motivated strikes and some undue worker benefits), but it serviced the entire country (including small towns), trains were NEVER late, ticket prices were stable and transparent. Since the EU forced the breakdown of SNCF under "free market" pretenses, trains are late, a lot fewer towns are serviced, ticket prices follow a marketing mania jigsaw, security and fairness in the trains is at an all time low. These days, corporate cronyism goes under the guise of free market and every EU politician gets a bite.
In France, the DAILY cost (hotel room, police, lawyers, etc) of keeping an illegal immigrant in a CRA on French territory (€ 690) is higher than the MONTHLY salary of one in three farmers and slightly higher than the pension of a farmer's wife. (Bernard Carayon, Mayor of Lavaur)
The police exist anyway. Lawyers are paid by the state anyway, and don't work for one client at a time. A hotel room does not cost 690 euros. Farmers don't get salaries; they're self-employed, and if they are employed, 690 euros is illegal unless they are working part-time. Your claim is nonsense.
@@Sascha5 "paid by the state anyway": do you kknow what a "state" means? ie paid by french people. Not just "A hotel room" cost 690 euros but add police, lawyers, etc. The last part shows that you don't knwow anything of the french peasant !!
You should do a video on the métiers of Artisanats in France. That will give context to how and why France continued to specialize rather than mass produce and why some of the best made items (of all types) are still produced, and will continue to be, in France.
Ah the Philips curve, measured by observation over one period of time using wages in one city in one country. That completely fell apart with stagflation
Sign up on Trading212 at www.trading212.com/promocodes/EE and get a random fractional free share worth up to €100 *Terms and fees apply.
Here is an idea for a new economic indicator. The number of desperate Indians migrating to a country should be used as a measure of a country's development levels. The more the rate of migration, the more the development and vice versa.
Economics Explained has a terrible reputation among academic economists. Essentially, unless you're Australia (where he's from), your country is currently or about to fall into an economic death spiral. Ever since watching that absurd video on the UK's economy, which was full of inaccurate claims, I've been highly sceptical of every video released.
Please review Canada again. The economy is so trash over here and I don't know how to improve it
Why was there no leaderboard?
Here is an idea for a new economic indicator. The number of desperate Indians migrating to a country should be used as a measure of a country's development levels. The more the rate of migration, the more the development and vice versa.
I'm an Australian living in France with a job, wife, kids, etc. The job protections and work life balance are comforting (and sometimes even confounding) even if wages are lower. Couldn't the work/life balance and job protections be used to draw in skilled workers from less balanced economies? It is a huge reason why we continue to live here.
The rigid job protections is a double edge sword.
Applying "too much" protection could stifle innovation within companies as these enterprises have little to no incentive to innovate as efficiency more often than not leads to needing less workers to produce the same output.
This has created problems for youth unemployment where companies have a bias against younger workers as many companies that do pay well don't want to take risks of hiring the "wrong" worker or someone that is inexperienced. It is extremely hard to fire people in French companies even if the person is not fit for the job.
Also, the birthrate problem is starting to bite France like every other European country and was partly why Macron raised the retirement age.
In the most honest terms, a welfare state, despite its humane advantages is pretty much structured like a Ponzi scheme. Young workers and children are the key ingredients for such society to be viable. But a mixture of cultural and economic issues is bringing the French Social Security system to breaking point, like a slow car crash.
Bonjour! J'ai appris français et allemand, mais pour moi la France a été toujours comme une deuxième option parce que le marché de travail est très competitif. Vraiment je pense à émigrer à l'Allemagne et utiliser le français comme un plus et seulement s'il est necessaire. Est-ce que vous pensez la même chose? Je suis microbiologiste (en realité mon métier est laboratoriste clinique). Je rêve en habiter en Europe.
@@TR4R Well done on learning french! I agree in that it is competitive. Everyone is highly educated compared to Europe and imo employers tend towards highly specialized candidates rather than candidates with divers yet applicable experience. Don't really know much about German work culture, but I have a few friends that emigrated there from France to work, so you wouldn't be alone ☺️
@@TR4R comme tu parles français et allemand ça peut être intéressant d'essayer la Suisse comme ce sont les deux langues les plus utilisées dans le pays, tu auras un coût de la vie élevé mais les salaires sont vraiment beaucoup plus élevés que dans le reste de l'Europe. Sinon oui l'Allemagne me paraît plus intéressante dans ton cas que la France
France already has a lot of skilled worker and is producing a lot of high tech technology, like France is the only country in the world with the US capable of producing a nuclear aircraft carrier
I'm french and I study economics. I have never been convinced by economics explained but now they made a video on a subject I know quite well, my doubts are confirmed. It's just a stack of clichés about France that have been seen hundreds of times and as many times disproved.
Where are the sources of the video in addition ?
Could you please provide an example of disproven clichés that you find the most outrageous?
@@Chronically_ChiII I might add, and this one I am not sure about, but I heard this "wage price spiral" isn't as common nor harmful as it seems.Nor as unstoppable. Type "wage price spiral debunked" into google and see for yourself
Yea ty, i thought exactly the same. And the last line "but now it's just getting outcompeted by places that are willing to work harder in ways that are more economically competitive" is just poorly written. This channel is from the US or GB probably, they only know ultracapitalism and judge everything with bias.
Oooh so this is the Whatifalthist of economics!
Thanks, completely agree as someone who lives in France. Also saying low unemployment is a big problem in France is just nonsense, historically France's unemployment has been higher than its peers. The whole video is a bunch of bs to be honest
EE said "The Industrial Revolution" so many times, I thought he was going to quote the Unibomber.
Oh my gosh 😂
Plot twist, he is Ted. 😂
Understanding Ted Kaczynski’s motives are a sign of maturity.
@@JamalW239 Understanding, sympathizing, but still rejecting his beliefs are signs of wisdom.
@@JamalW239 He was a repressed femboy who wanted to blame society for his lack of social skills.
Sure, he made some valid points about technology. But, a lot of his suffering was self-imposed.
I have spent a lot of time in France and my brother in law lives there. All I heard is “Yes I can earn more but I get more time off here”. They aren’t loosing young people. They are proud of the way they live.
France is the 2nd victim of brain drain in the world after India, they are losing young brains but attracting lazy young people, and no they don't like it, it's one of the most depressed and pessimistic countries in the world
We are loosing very skilled workers. Personally I work mostly for clients outside of the country because money.
@Zero-kd1bd the cope is coming from the people who live in countries with trash work-life balances that run people into the ground by their early 40s. You'll see, lol.
We are not losing skilled workers, we don't make them anymore.
When there was enough of them, there was a national push to make them. Nowadays politics only deal with it as "if needed we will make thé job attractive for foreign skilled workers" witch don't work so well.
Don't change thé french way of life, just change thé politics for thooses that don't think hospital are a cost, but an investissement for exemple.
I have a lot of respect for the French. I know this is an economics channel, but if you just examine France through the eyes of an economist, you miss a lot of what makes the country great. You touched on this tbf. They'll be fine; they have a variety of geography and climate, almost as much coast as the uk, and a huge amount of farmland. Tourism for days. And historically they've made some sensible choices on things like energy and defense.
hear hear
He’s talking about productivity and relative productivity. Overall, productivity eats tourism and farmland/resources for breakfast. Just look at Russia. You can’t fake it and you can’t buy it. It’s the special sauce. It’s what made Germany, Japan and China nr. 2,3&4.
@@john.8805 France is fine for 700 years... I doubt this will change in our lifetime.
And cheese.
They are absolutely crowded with migrants from third world countries
Basically when judging france you could compare it more to central africa
I think is a bit disingenuous to say dirigisme causes inflation in the 70-80s when every western country have the same inflation graph due to the oil crisis.
It was a significantly contributing factor, but this is a monetised UA-cam video
I mean in Italy it happened the same thing with basically the same approach to economy: I mean, it is true that the oil crises were the trigger, but inflation was high for nearly 20 years, even in periods where the oil price was low, ie the second half of the 80s.
Now on one hand all major economies till the oil crises were in one way or another similar to France regarding the approach used, considering than since 1929 Keynesism was more or less the approach used everywhere in the west. Let’s say them at in the US and the UK the shift toward a contemporary approach to an economy was made earlier than in France or Italy (if it has been made at all 😅).
Just take what he says with grain of salt. Even is conclusion is flawed: what are the other advanced economies that does not spend beyond their means? Most do and with even more growing inequalities and decline of living standards.
Oil crises bring higher prices, not inflation. Printing money to cope with increasing prices does bring inflation. Crises are temporary, inflation is not.
@@Gearparadummies Inflaction is literally defined as the increase of prices.
I don’t think you know how “C’est la vie” is used.
Doesn’t that mean "see you later" or "good bye"?
@@FictionHubZA It means "That's how it goes", basically
That's life.
@@onelonejackal613 Ohhhhh. Thanks.
@@FictionHubZA It is what it is, *shrugs*
Thesis of the video: economic well-being and sustainability is a function of productivity & competition
Quote from the closing statement: "but now it's just getting outcompeted by places that are *willing to work harder* in ways that are more economically competitive"
This odd touch of catty-ness is super unnecessary to the point where it's self-undermining. I don't use the word "objectively" often, but this is a situation where the script would have objectively worked better had someone crossed out that bit in the editing room: "but now it's just getting outcompeted by places that are that are more economically competitive"
I encourage others to consider the counterfactuals; Japan's "hard" work culture which has yielded little, if any, substantial economic productivity gains. Perhaps I've gone and unfairly twisted the original intended meaning of the script... but if anything I think that underscores the problem: "working hard" is a values judgement with no concrete basis in economic science.
Oh my God you just voiced what I was thinking about you are right working hard is an economic value. I was thinking why is there so much emphasis on productivity and competition but it’s kind of interesting looking at it and seeing France also developed in Japan also developed but the work cultures are so significantly different From a guy who lives in India. This is very interesting because we are developing economy right now. so thanks a lot for voicing this. This was literally the problem I had with the video❤
I loved the off and unnecessarily part. I had to point out that living beyond their means is so quickly said pointing towards retirement, and working class. And so rarely pointed towards those such as the previously mentioned luxury brand billionaire.
Most measures of "productivity" are really measuring population growth. This is why Japan does so poorly.
he means working harder as in businesses spending more on increasing output per worker. So, more like the US than Japan.
yes or you could look hours worked per week.
his argument does not have any basis in data
I usually like your videos. I'm Australian, living in France. I have an executive role in a global company. Some interesting analysis. However, the title is apocalyptic and a number of comments are reckless generalisations and slights. In my experience of living in both, I think life can be better here than in Australia whose economy is a perpetual real estate and minerals bubble, at the mercy of the Chinese.
Economics Explained has a terrible reputation among academic economists. Essentially, unless you're Australia (where he's from), your country is currently or about to fall into an economic death spiral. Ever since watching that absurd video on the UK's economy, which was full of inaccurate claims, I've been highly sceptical of every video released
as a french I did find this video pretty bad about my country, like this video was clearly made from stereotype and not reality, we have lot of challenges but saying that our first problem is the state having too much state own companies is bad because we don't have much state own companies since 50 years at least
Nobody asked troll
nobody asked you either troll@@AuroraDawnxx97
My favourite was when he tried to defend car-centric cities, rebutting most research with a couple of hand-wavy agruments which kinda resembled existing economic theories, but simply did not apply.
Hahaha... yeah he don't know europe... if France is collapsing rest of the eu is starving to death... we can still afford food... 😂
As a french I do think this video was pretty poorly researched and made out of stereotype unfortunatly.... state owned companies are not that much a thing anymore.... we have many challenges but reducing state companies is really not one of them, no one will agree with you here
Very much
Anglos win everything including arguments at the end of the day. Do the opposite and only then there’s a glimmer of hope to thrive.
Not to mention, in comparison to other countries, I wonder how France compares to the US.
Point-in-fact the largest employer in the US: the federal government.
Comme d'hab lorsqu'un anglo-saxon parle de notre économie. Il a quand même réduit notre economie à faire des sacs trop chère avec un peuple de fainéants qui vit sur ses acquis 😂
SNCF,
Education Nationale,
EDF,
Sécurité Sociale?????
Something weird/terrible is happening in all the big economies it seems
It's almost like they are buying votes?
You're right. China, Japan, Germany, France, all struggling
@@jorgecuevas8843 The UK and US too
Troll alert. Growth is picking up a lot in the US
@@shaaravguha3760US is famously outperforming right now, what are you on about
An excellent example of the french national industries is covered in youtuber Perun's episode on French military procurement. Despite not being a super power, France manages to field equipment that is only reserved to actual super powers such as aircraft carriers, nuclear subs, nuclear weapons, it's own fighter aircraft, tanks, artillery, vehicles and more.
Yes, and it is linked to a really important notion for the french government (not explorer in this video) : soverainism
@@imperator31Does that mean the country making all its own military equipment, the gov't doing if instead of the private sector, or something else entirely? I've watched Perun's excellent piece, but I generally know more about the German economy than the French one (at least as far as European economies go)
UK has those too and is no more a superpower. Also, France is world's 3rd weapon exporter, almost on par with Russia
@@oliviere1215 The UK and France are very comparable in almost every metric.
De gaule basically say the world needs something else than USA or Russia in term of power they need something in the middle that why India will try to buy weapon from us and why Australia was stopped from buy French weapons. Now with Russia weapons proved to be some kind of a joke in that Ukraine war France will or should experience a growth in its relative importance due to a growth of military exports
I have to admit, they have a pretty impressive version of silicon valley. They have a lot of good software developers and a strong creative gaming industry.
According to the video, the major problem is state funded company. But the funded state companies represents only 3,1% of the employment in France. All along, there is almost no numbers given to put the content into perspective...
I agree with you, this thesis is nothing but bs
When I saw the thumbnail and title, I thought to myself "this is gonna be some Anglo-liberal propaganda isn't it?". Looks like I was right.
You are missing some details i see
Pretty sure the numbers for overall public employment are much higher. Public-sector employees work less (produce less) per person and get paid more, exerting upward pressure on inflation.
@@nonmagicmike723 As of today there are 30 M workers and 5.7 M public sector employees. 19%
I think your arrangement of the flight of the Huguenots and the French Revolution(s) implies a conflation between the two. The bulk of Huguenots left France in 1685, more than 100 years before the French Revolution 1789, and long before France's industrial revolution in the 1830s. While the loss of the Huguenots represented a serious loss of human capital of France, none of them would have been the engineers, scientists, or specialists critical to the French industrial revolution by virtue of predating it by so much.
Otherwise a very informative and intriguing video. Thank you very much!
But that's the thing. The industrial revolution began in the 18th century. Steam power allowed for substantial advancement, yes, but water-powered factories had been around long before then. Indeed, the reason for the first engines was to expand the capacity and reliability of *existing* coal mines.
By 1830, the UK was already considering railroads and steamships. The mills and metalworks were already huge. They had to import coal and iron because they couldn't mine it fast enough. France had the potential for all that, *and more.*
Yep that's a biased WASP take, EE disappoints in verifying his sources once again.
@@watchm4ker it's also worth noting that the UK already had canals and railroads in the 17th century. It's funny to think about, but the UK and Germany both had railways long before trains had been invented! So even before steam engines, as you say, there were already significant increases in coal output, iron output, textiles output and fertiliser outputs that set the stage for a true industrial revolution. And French hugenots did end up contributing greatly to the development of the UK's financial institutions and a few industries like silk weaving, wine making and cultery manufacturing
Yes, but the point is those who left went with the skills and innovation for the next generations. Like he said, the Industrial revolution didn't happen overnight. In Britain, before railways we had canals and before cotton factories we had small scale textile makers.
While we were producing skilled engineers and innovating using steam, the French were contemplating philosophy :)
@@rogink To be fair, the English were developing a first-class philosophical framework during this same time period.
I think it would be interesting to compare Scandinavian countries, which also have very strong welfare systems and France and see what they are potenially doing better/worse than each other and where they could learn from each other. Naturally you often hear economists to demand to cut down on the social security and welfare systems to solve economic problems but i'm not sure if this is always the best solution. Also i think it would be nice to include a few more statistics to emphasize where exactly the problems of certain economies lie and in which way economic measures are hoping to change those.
Scandanavians have less invading illegals still. Don't worry it'll catch up.
Quite simply; Norway is the sole country with a long-term sustainable welfare system, and that's only because of the disproportionate sovereign fund they amassed by hitting the natural resource lottery.
Sweeden and Denmark both have a higher % of the population below the poverty line compared to France specifically, and higher even % at risk of falling below. Systemic changes are necessary, whether they'll happen naturally (progressive automatization due to rise of AI & other technologies) or by forced policy (and how?) is the actual question that merits a discussion.
Sweden is a particularly interesting example because of the way that the welfare state has been used to create an extremely entrepreneurial culture. They have one of the highest rates of new start-ups in the world, and there are more unicorns in Stokholm than anywhere except Silicon Valley, and a bit part of the reason is the welfare state being designed to encourage it while ensuring that people are confident about being ok should things fall through.
Of course, at the same time, the Swedish krona has historically been all over the place as a currency which suggests something quite serious going on under the surface of the Swedish economy.
Also very tight immigration rules. Any economy that thinks it can give away money to anyone who walks in will never survive.
@@epicurean1868one get that if one is fairly treated and have a social welfare that works for the citizens.
The most terrible thing happening to France is our public service going downhill even though there are so much taxes. The money is just not going where it should.
It saddens me even more as an economist that attended a public university...
It is more a political problem that an economic one and I think it involves the higher echelons of those sectors. A good scrubing of the public sector is in order.
@@mattguellecTHIS 🙌🙌 french people need to understand that some public services they DO NOT NEED (saying this as one of them)
@@mattman3960Can you go more on details ’cause I think I didn’t understand (you can speak in french too)
@@6visages954 i meant that some public services are just a waste of money that could be spent elsewhere (other public services that actually serve a purpose, reducing our ridiculous debt to GDP ratio or smth)
@@mattman3960 yeah sure, maybe. To be honest I don’t know enough to have a strong point of view on this topic. What I know tho it’s we are bless to have acces to a lots of publics services, education(from kindergarden to college), health mental, health, or retirement... And I truely belive it’s important to preserve it. But lots and LOTS of money are not going where it should. I am talking about frauds from inside and outside the gouvernement. Or people just straight up robing. People that abuse of the systeme because we are more and more paranoid (I talked to a doctor and she told that more and more people where going to the hospital for things that could be handle by doctor or people going to the doctor for nothing). I also belive that a lots of money is waisted on jobs that doesn’t deed to exist while others jobs that are very important are neglicted. I sure did forget to say other very important things. But in the end I think we should be more see through on where the money is spent and where it’s invested. And also doing a great good clean up.
The video says that inflation and dirigism were at their peak in the '80s. What I see is a peak around the oil crises of 1974 and 1979 - exactly as happened in the US, where dirigism wasn't a factor. How did inflation in France compare to that in the US?
What on earth is dirigism? I saw this word twice here...
Heh, i'd disagree with dirigism being at it's peak in the late 80s. De Gaulle yes, but others following him ? It has gotten worse and worse.
@@machintrucGaming Could someone tell me what dirigism is. I guess I could look it up.
Inflation was high in both France and the US in 1981-82 but France did better in 1983 and afterwards.
@@MissBabalu102 Basically it means the state intervenes a lot in the private sector because it doesn’t trust the market ability to regulate itself while still maintaining the interests of the consumers, employees and small businesses.
I'm french and the public service is going downhill, especially health, education and energy
C’est à cause de l’immigration non ?
I agree for health and education, but not energy. It's not perfect, but I'm pretty optimistic for the energy side in the long term as France is among the few that kept their Nuclear capabilities.
Comme tous les pays occidentaux car ils sont dirigé par des politiciens corrompus qui servent l'agenda du forum économique mondial et autres organisations globalistes pour asservir le peuple petit à petit.
try experiencing healthcare, education, and energy in the US. Every country is under pressure, some more than most. Its relative and I believe the french should be proud that their system appears to be falling a lot less than most. Kinda stupid thing to say but its what I think outside looking in. Most french would feel like living in the US is farrr worse, unless they have a high paying tech job which is what the US is about, modern day feudalism where the rich experience a good life and the rest toil in the mud
@@WalkingHeadPro , grass is always greener on the other side regardless where one lives.
'Some fringe economists' being the most influential economists of the last 100 years ...
This channel never fails to impress with the ignorance of the writers.
All the services he mentioned could also be easily transactable through insurance companies because they are essentially insurance services. I swear to god it's like everyone who talks about economy instantly forget about insurance services.
I'm french living in France. This video is so funny. They defintly don't know what they are talking about, finding another scapegoat for artificially created inflation in any occidental country.
And soon CBDCs, people ... (well, if we don't have a civil war until then)
I watched a recent video on this channel about the UK. It was broadly positive and gave the UK a pleasingly rosey future. I love in the UK. None of what the video presented tallied with my lived experience. I travel around France regularly. I wish my country was more like France. I'm not an economist but I know what I like.
>The Uk
>A rosey future
UK is a shithole. France is lovely.
You need to wipe your behind when you go to the loo...@@DJPleasureSeekingMissle
@@walterbraun3731what?
As an Englishman with a french partner, who regularly visits and has lived in both, France is significantly worse than the UK in almost every way except climate and food
I am a frenchman, I haven't watched the video yet, and seeing the title, I say to myself : "What is so terrible ? It's just monday."
Edit : I wached the video, and yeah, it's just monday. Nothing unusual.
Try watching them as a Brit. Yeah, nah, all good but yeah. Monday then. Apparently Im fucked and love in a box now. News to me.
now it's wednesday night, you can relax until monday
T as fait l école du rire toi.
People try to predict the economy not realizing it is not a capitalistic market, its a command economy, central planning! my concern is, instead of having much dollar in bank that could lose value to inflation, do I save in gold to reserve and grow wealth for now, or just hang on?
Sure, investing is plain-sailing with the aid of an invt-specialist, thus I've always delegated my excesses ever since the rona-outbreak in January 2020 using a shrewd advisor, and my investments have compounded by at least 300%, summing up $820k ROI as of today.
Certainly, there are a handful of experts in the field. I've experimented with a few over the past years, but I've stuck with ‘’AILEEN GERTRUDE TIPPY” for about five years now, and her performance has been consistently impressive.She’s quite known in her field, look-her up.
Thank you for this tip. It was easy to find your coach. Did my due diligence on her before scheduling a phone call with her. She seems proficient considering her resume.
Bot alert ^
Capitalism doesn’t exist on earth right now. We have corporatism and lobbying. If there are any restrictions it’s not free enterprise, if they print money not backed by the gold standard and lobby government workers to gain soecial treatment it’s not true capitalism. That’s corporatism and how we have companies larger than nations now.
French here. Our system is not effective at all, and we have a deep problem with this effectiveness… That made that yes from a small company economy, we went to a big company economy.
We don’t have enough small businesses. Every market has its own kind of “monopoly company” that control sometimes over 50% of the market shares.
Just because at the end, if you want to create your business you have one of the highest tax rates in the world…
"Cest la vie" means "such is life", often about bad events. Maybe it should instead say "La vie en rose" which is actually about a good life.
The assumption that private companies will always try to reduce their costs is questionable. The people running these companies may have motives other than increasing profitability like paying their board members as much as possible or satisfying the empire-building megalomania of certain executives. Where there is less than perfect competition this will often be the case.
Good thing about private companies, they will get outcompeted by other private companies and collapse if they keep doing that.
Unlike a state enterprise, it will fail without affecting the government or wasting tax payer money. That's one of the main advantages of (capitalism) private enterprises over state sponsored ones, it doesn't matter if some or many of them fail.
@@HemantKumar-id3jg Only if there's genuine competition. Many private companies operate as duopolies or oligopolies.
@@budawang77 Didn't he say just that? What are you even disputing then?
And although rare there is still a way to make companies (who are monpolies or duopolies) competitive. By laws or by breaking them into smaller companies. In a state enterprise there is no such option and the people who will lose employment if the enterprise collapses will keep political pressure on the government to let the inefficient companies running which means more waste of taxes.
@budawang77 that’s not how late stage capitalism works, unfortunately
@@HemantKumar-id3jg Every economist will tell you that perfect competition is a theoretical myth. A LOT of industries are highly concentrated. And no, before you say it, that's not just due to the govt.
I wonder how punitive it is for small businesses to start and hire workers in France? Things like paid maternity leave, unemployment insurance, on the job injury insurance. It seems quit expensive for a small business to hire people here in Canada. What effects does that have on the over all economy of a country?
So odd that the economic system penalizes a nation for taking care of its people. Does the lack of healthcare in the US lead to jobs being lost in Canada and France? The world may be connected sometimes in unkind ways.
punitive measures almost never work- just like youre in a bad place if your government has to save you from absolute death and homelessness- an economy simply cant run on debt forever. i think thats the pit fall- were obsessed with paying back- but paying back a debt actually has no value. banning late fees- seems like the obvious for instance- as its punitive and only works to reduce productivity. you turn a literate skilled human into a vagrant drain on the safety net. but we need to replace that gate with something less about debt and more about value. the ubi plus some debt forgiveness kickback for people under stressful collapsing personal finances a cap on profit margin that taxes beyond 300% or so of relevant inputs- and gives credit to those that comply or over adjust in favor of their workers- this credit can unlock a privilege they may seek like land development- less costs for things like permits yada yada. you know a positive flow rule set- that encourages them to do valuable things on their own. essentially you could still run the business like usual- you can cut costs, become more efficient lay off workers all thats stuff- but youll only grow if you developed a healthy workforce and showed some social responsibility as a company. im sure theres plenty of like this stuff in law all around the world- but i dont think we considered how its merely punitive measures messing us up. if youre always repairing a window- youre not making another one. this is true economically socially and politically.
Well I'm from France and for what it's worth I can say that 200 of my colleagues got laid off at my old work because their jobs were moved over to Portugal where minimum wage is half that of France and there's much much less corporate tax. Since both Portugal and France are in the EU, they still have access to the exact same free market without any drawbacks for doing this to lower costs.
@@daniellarson3068 There is nothing odd about the fact that encouraging people not to work as long leads to less production, even in socialism, communism or whatever system you use, it will always be a fact that less people working and less hours worked means less production. Until robots fully replace humanity, it will stay like that, and even then there are signs that the general population, technologically illiterate as it is, is unable to understand that robots aren't people, so you can bet they'll end up giving them weekend breaks or something.
Edit : Having good healthcare coverage is not bad for production unless it is so generous and lenient you are better off sick and insane work hours actually can result in less production. It's all in the balance, a thing France is lacking currently.
I've heard stuff about France that seems particularly rigid and burdensome. Businesses have to think thoroughly before hiring because laying off afterward isn't so easy.
Some corrections: inflation in France was never driven by a lower-than-optimum unemployment. French unemployment has historically been higher than its comparable Western European counterparts (UK, Germany). Conversely, French productivity is also higher than that of those comparable countries. Whereas the brain drain in France is lower than in the UK or in the Netherlands, and barely higher than Germany or the US.
productivity per worked hour
because in france people only actually work during working hour. no coffee/cigarette break for almost every job. but french people work about only 40h a week (35 for public servants, that's very low in comparision to usa, japan or china. in china 54h a week is very common)
@@MonCompteTubulaire The average USA working week is 34.1 hours. You should check your claims.
When you say "countries that are willing to work harder," I hear "in countries where the powerful exploit the workers more." I didn't know much about French economics before the video, and don't know much now, but one thing is true: it's not France that has a problem, it's the rest of the world.
No
It is also ignoring the fact that a majority of "productivity" is due to technology and mechanization not any amount of 'working harder'
It so happens that I am French and I have a similar take.
It is not so much that strong worker protections and services as well as dirigisme are "beyond our means" in and of themselves. After all, those were financially viable for decades and were far more developed at the time than they are now (with some inefficiencies for sure, but also great benefits).
It is that, with globalisation, France came to compete with countries who would rather give the share of GDP spent on those to the rich instead. Before that, economic participants of the French economy more or less had to comply with whatever worker rights were voted in and that was it. Now they can relocate to avoid the cost, hence inducing a race to the bottom. There is no such thing as "the French economy" anymore. It is the global economy. Only in that sense is France living beyond its means.
As I see it, what is happening in France is just part of a general global trend of fewer rich people getting even richer and an increasingly high number of poorer people getting squeezed even harder. France is only special in that it had better worker benefits so it is falling from a much higher place.
Yes, this. Capitalism doesn't need to be inhumane. It doesn't need to be rapacious. But the few at the top promote the all-or-nothing belief so they can perpetuate their own sociopathy.@@MrSupergigamoi
@@MrSupergigamoi correct but globalization is coming to an end, and in this new future, France will actually have it a lot better than most other countries.
I think your title should have read ‘la vie en rose is over’; cest La vie is a sort of shoulder shrug that’s said after something unfortunate happens. It’s a literal translation of ‘that’s life’ and is used the same. Something you’d say after you loose a wallet or your bicycle is stolen kinda thing.
‘La vie en rose’ on the other hand is sort of analogous to ‘looking at life through rose colored glasses’ although not exactly the same.
The wage price inflation is a boogeyman used to reduce wages (relative to inflation). Over the years, the proportion of people earning close to minimum wage is increasing. It wouldn't surprise me that a country like Poland or Hungary will have higher wages than France in less than 20 years. The other problems are basic liberalism: lower taxes to the rich, increase taxes for everybody else, the government is hemorrhaging money by cutting its tax revenue, oligopolies are stagnating wages, public workers are getting wage cuts and their benefits are slashed, privatization of public services etc... An advanced state of this trend would be mirrored in the USA.
The proportion of people earning close to minimum wage is increasing because as minimum wage increases, those who would once be making a middle class wage are now making closer to what a burger flipper makes. The higher minimum wage gets, the more the middle class suffers and is dragged down by rising tides.
The concept of a wage price spiral, presented here as fact, is far from being so. Even the Cato Institute (Libertarian) says it's bunk. "The idea that wage‐price spirals cause inflation - that higher prices lead to higher wage demands, which beget further higher prices and then higher wages again and again - is a long‐standing myth, and a dangerous one given it can lead to such misguided policy."
I'm Italian living in France, I have seen your video on the end of Dolce Vita, now France is falling apart... Is the fiesta over for Spain too? Is Germany up Schnitzel creek? Is it nevermore for the Netherlands? I am mocking gently because I find your videos well made but I think your titles are too over dramatic and fear mongering. Yes Europe is in a Sea Change in terms of Demographics and Economics but if civilisation has taught us anything it's that we will adapt. I agree with the comments about France's over taxation and the need to modernise and streamline the bureaucracy, the real flaw at the moment is that the three main political parties are all populists who actually need the very problems they claim to want to solve in order to exist as a valid political entity, otherwise they may actually have to do some real work in improving infrastructure and services.
Is Frances economy really stagnating that much? I think it's dangerous to constantly think about improving the economy because if you focus on this then you end up with a country like the USA. Sure, it's economy is great but people have 10 days off work a year. Sometimes governments (and economists) forget what the real objective is, and that is to optimise the well-being of its citizens. If that means a productive economy then great, but not at the expense of its citizens' well-being.
Basically, the govt has been ensuring a healthy lifestyle and work/life balance for its people for decades but EU and Global companies dont like what they are doing there because it will slightly eat into their profits and France is deciding to up lift and change their economy at the expense of workers and society.
At least france actively invests in its future, whether that's its people or infrastructure. The UK hasn't done that since the 2000s.
Say thank you to the Blair government for that.
@@RealLimerickman Nothing to do with the govt that's been in control for the last 14 years?
After a certain point, what would happen if workers were given equity instead of higher wages? Would this prevent a wage price spiral?
What if workers demanded better technology instead of higher wages? (And that improved productivity)
What if workers negotiated increased occupancy health and safety standards instead of higher wages? (That might reduce the usage of paid ‘sick leave’ days off)
You indirectly have equity in most major businesses. Through your pension fund. And also your insurer if you for example have life insurance.
@@FaustsKanaal that’s a good point.
Having equity where you work puts you in a different position than just an employee shouting for a pay rise. This is especially true if the equity comes with full voting rights and the ability for you to pass on your equity in your will.
Imagine wanting a company to cut staff expenses (and numbers) so that your shares increase in value, but at the same time wanting to keep your job and wanting your workmates to keep their job.
Imagine how you would feel about people taking sick leave when they’re not sick.
The culture would change to much more of a team culture.
The new largest companies like Google, Apple, Intel, Microsoft, are global and US has the benefit of a large home market and outside US most people know English so they can easily expand. France has a smaller home market and French is less used, of course many learn English but it is still a hindrance I think.
France will come out on top when globalization hits full reverse mode, protectionism comes back, and all of a sudden everyone must depend on their own industry/resources/strengths in all fields to get by. You forgot to mention one very important thing: France is almost self-sufficient in food, most heavy industry, and electricity production.
It would be good to hear your views on the tradeoff between national competitiveness and standards of living. Why is it such a bad thing to have a lower level of productivity if the standard of living is higher than other economies? And over the long term?
I feel like the long term issue is that it's a fragile system where things need to go right to sustain the social nets.
Plus if everyone is in a mindset that their needs are taken care of I can see how on surface level folks won't try to push for innovation.
Productivity is income _per hour worked._ It is impossible to have a good standard of living without good productivity (unless hunting-gathering is your idea of a good life).
@@alphamikeomega5728 However, working less is also good for productivity and having a vegetable garden (gathering), not needing childcare, in addition to being profitable for a household, is also profitable for France which would not have need to spend on care, sick leave, daycare, there are many more advantages than one would think, especially if from a capitalist point of view.
There's no point working 50 hours a week, if it means that the French spend all the money on trips abroad, iPhones, Tesla, Amazons, etc.
What destroyed the French economy is excessive capitalism protected by the government, Europe and the ability to always postpone what should have been done a long time ago and now it is much more expensive than 20 years ago, that's good we no longer have the money and technical means...
Globalization has pretty much made your wish impossible. Competitiveness on the global market is important to sustain the standard of living that you are talking about. You simply can't have your cake and eat it too. (It's also likely that the French sustained a high standard of living by feeding off the colonies in the past). The glory days are gone.
The problem with that idea is math + globalization.
Another thing to consider is that if a government owned company is inefficient is a detriment to the taxpayer because it doesn’t exist in a vacuum. The resources have a cost of opportunity to be used elsewhere by government to provide other goods to its citizens. Tax money is not infinite as politicians think it is and there’s only so much debt a country can sustain.
Not only that but a government owned company makes it almost impossible for actual businesses to survive in a particular industry (cannot compete with an entity that cannot go bankrupt / is heavily subsidized or hogs all resources (airport slots or tracks).
Around 13:30 Germany in its economic boom had what's called full employment. Nobody argues that this was bad. Nor was there hyperinflation. So why are you arguing that full employment causes it?
Full employment doesn't mean zero unemployment.
He provided a caveat that you may have missed. Full employment causes inflation if the productivity of workers is outstripped by their demand in wages, while also providing no alternative to employers. It's simply the case that the economic boom in Germany gave them more leeway to hire more people without having an inflationary effect.
@@warrenschrader7481 no but it was at a very low point even at one point being under 0.8%
@@D4PPZ456 shouldn't any highly developed economy then still not need to fear the effects of full employment? In Germany today if you look at the population without the migrants they too have almost full employment?
So you're telling me that those migrants nowadays who are in welfare are saving Germany from massive maybe hyperinflation. Infact if they were to get a job it might be extremely dangerous to the German Economy? That is absolut rubbish.
If people make new wealth in a job. It is better for the economy than if they were unemployed.
If there is almost no unemployment and wages rise it will lead to a better allocation of labour as if there are more jobs than workers it should lead to better allocation of labor into the more productive and better compensated jobs.
If there are always unemployed than there will not be the redistribution to more productive roles at the same scale. So in fact I believe that full employment strengths some of the strongest market forces!
Thay full employment made them scout workers from Eastern, Southern Europe and Anatolia.
A small note on hiring in government vs. private enterprise: managers in large corporations are often incentivized to hire and retain excess personnel in order to inflate their department's budget, or their ego (higher number of direct reports).
This....seems to be something that would eventually hurt competitiveness of that firm? Not to mention, many government positions are literally sinecures given for backing the winning horse, hence why so many of them could be cut temporarily during covid with no effect to government services (look up how much of the DOE essentially didn't work during lockdown).
I think you’re right that to a certain extent managers in large corporations do act this way, but if you’re implying that this somehow creates more bloat than governmental organizations, that’s where I’d have to disagree.
You can only bloat your department so much in a corporation before you have a down year and then layoff 20% of your staff
@@Low_commotionYou are correct which is a problem many of the largest corporations face. They hit the opposite side of economics of scale.
If you look at KPIs of government workers/departments, they're often 20-30% of private enterprises. The government loves building complex systems (it's a bureaucracy) which don't help the workers to get things done efficiently... for the same amount of output, even a large inefficient private enterprise would probably only need 1/3rd the amount of employees - and it would pay them better. But you do need government to keep large enterprises from becoming natural monopolies. Occasionally a tiny company develops ways to be disruptively more efficient. They can't flourish without the shade from the big guys being pared back a bit...
Often the less skilled worker is less productive or they are older or very young. But that does not mean that they are unemployable. It means that they will seek entry level or semi-skilled labor work that may be part time or seasonal to augment full time permanent workers during business peak cycle times. They will usually get less pay, and they will save less of their wages because there is usually a minimum cost of living associated with housing, transportation and food in any place of business/city.
France can have that system too, where there are more job openings, but the skill level is less and the pay is less.
What is bad is when a person has been at a company three years, and has only received their annual cost of living raises but knows a lot more about the company and their job than new hires that can often be hired at a much higher initial starting pay than the person that was there for three years and may be effectively training them and making in some cases the same pay.
There is no incentive to work for a company any longer than to learn skills and then sell those skills to their competitor if the company is not willing to train, and improve them and pay them more. That was often the case in Software.
The whole concept of perpetual growth is entirely unsustainable. If increased personal wellbeing isn't the ultimate goal of a society, then what is? GDP growth at the expense of the worker inevitably leads to inequality and instability.
Seeing this video tdy👀👀
The comments show that within a globalized world, it’s more possible than ever to choose an economy that suits your own ethos for what is a good life. Being from the UK I’ve always preferred the European culture of working to live rather than vice versa but I probably wouldn’t think like this without access to basic needs like healthcare, food and housing. Still seems weird though that people chase wealth endlessly once you’ve accumulated more than you need, having time to swim in the med and visit the mountains seems more valuable than figures in a bank
As a Brit having lived in France for the past 18 years, I can honestly say that life here is way better than across the Channel in Broken Brexit Britain.
grass is always greener elsewhere
The problem with standard economic theory of inflation is so much of standard economics is mathematically and behaviorally false. Because theory is like theory of lunar cheese variety, it’s solution policy is just not in touch with reality.
5:42 "while human labor in other industrial economies was thrown into the literal meat grinder of early industry"
The correct word it figurative. It would be really gross and counter productive to throw human labor into a literal meat grinder.
Frenches enjoy their life and love their lifestyle. Ask them that they would like to live like Americans, German or Japanese.
They will say no without hesitation. So France does not need to change.
They can say that, but if the money isn't there to support that lifestyle they're out of luck. That's what the pension age increase was all about.
@@kingofhearts3185 Relying on the pension Ponzi scheme is a mistake. Also money doesn't mean wealth, but the accessible goods and services mean wealth, because you can have all the money in the world on a lonely island, you ain't wealthy in that case.
Work and life balance is important, since time is worth more than an inflating currency. Making everyone running harder in the hamster wheel may look like better economic output, but the price is that the workers can't enjoy life that much anymore, because they have less time to do so and everyone burns out faster.
@@Ningen18 And you still need money to have all of that. It's a means to an end, not the end itself. But you can't get there without means. What good is time if you're in poverty?
@@kingofhearts3185 That's why work and life balance is important. Poverty is when you can't provide value or when you can't barter that value to someone else's value. Working and spending your salary is just a way to exchange your precious time to somone else's precious time. The currency is just a lubricant. Also note that money is not the same as currency, because money keeps the value of your labor, while the inflating currency does not.
@@Ningen18 Is that meant as a critique or an elaboration? I don't think anything you said is wrong, I just don't see how it's meant to disprove my point.
"...a set of handcuffs for anyone who doesn't want to pay for their subscription to society..."😂 Well said.
"C'est la vie is over" makes absolutely no sense. It's not the same as dolce vita, they know that, right..? Have thy even bothered to Google what it means?
I think they mistake "c'est la vie" for "la vie en rose"
Interesting thought. The point about having competition increases the chance of innovation which increases technology and profits. The opposite would be government run which may stagnation in advancements because they really don't have competition to be more profitable. There is the phenomenon where healthcare in the US is a private industry and although there is some competition, consumers are gauged like never before. Maybe this can be caulked up to corruption or profiting on someone's emergency (extortion).
Thanks!
Admits french model isnt working and then says "other economies could learn from" total disconnect lol
Economics isn't as simple as good or bad. All economies have strengths that others could learn from and weaknesses they could improve on.
@@ryanf6530 id agree with you if you were talking about any other advanced economy but the french one. The only thing to learn from the french model is how not to do it.
Disappointing to see the “Wage Price Spiral” such prominence, when it is such a rare occurrence in the last 40 years. In competitive markets, those basket workers getting an extra 50c would put pressure on a) the profit margins b) executive compensation and c) the drive to innovate and automate, just as much as it would place pressure on prices
He didn't talk about it because it's happened a lot in the last forty years. He talked about it because it happened a lot prior to that, and countries including France have avoided wage-hiking policies because they know it will happen again. It's not a question that it happens. It's one of the most repetitive phenomena in economics. The question is, and has been, how to create growth without triggering it, and France is bad at it because of how they organize their institutions.
@@ideologybot4592 To qualify as "the most repetitive phenomena in economics" it would really want to be happening regularly in the last four decades, no?
I think it is most likely to occur when labour is a substantial portion of overall costs, and wage increases would have heavy pressure on prices. Labour becomes a smaller portion of costs in an economy as it industrialises and modernises, so I don't think it's surprising that it was a big issue in the past but not such a big issue now.
@@ptanham Even in an industrial economy, the majority of major businesses have labor as their biggest expense if you look deep enough. Even if you look at something like a restaurant where labor isn't the biggest line item cost, the biggest item is food and the biggest cost for a food supplier will be processing and that comes back to labor. If you have something like a logistics company, they have to pay for equipment and maintenance which they can contract, but contracting is still a mostly-labor expense. They pay for people and diesel, that's basically it.
The only expenses that don't come back to labor in some way are energy and various types of monopolistic rents. So labor is still the overwhelmingly important cost for nearly everything, and the link between increasing labor costs and inflation has given some modern economists reason to look back at the Phillips curve.
It's not a secret that, in America particularly, wages have stagnated since the mid-1970's while inflation has been controlled since not long after. This isn't an accident. We've been managing a fundamental truth of economics well and paying the price in having a stagnating middle and working class. That doesn't mean the principle ceases to exist.
I moved to France, love it here, have a much better quality of life and can experience so much more ( vacations close to home tourism, culture...) on a yearly income ghat would put me below poverty line in ghe USA. I own a house and large enough garden (to ot waste all my free time on it, enought to garden and hang out. 800m2) in a coasral town known for it’s history and dynamic sports and cultural life.
Where?
and what do you do for living? France, like many European countries has a very centralized economy with all the juiciest jobs in Paris. Outside Paris, without a strong inherited capital like a house you are basically cooked. If you came to France with half a million dollars yes, life is beautiful. If you instead found a job there with less than 50K gross/year, you are cooked.
"Nobody can predict the future, least of all economists". This is probably the most spoken line but everytime it is said, there's a smirk on my face.
So the argument seems to be that France is turning into Argentina basically, right?
5:00 One of them, was the father of Isambard Kingdom Brunel. Who became was a famous engineer.
Given the persisting global economic crisis, it's essential for individuals to focus on diversifying their income streams independent of governmental reliance. This involves exploring options such as stocks, gold, silver, and digital currencies. Despite the adversity in the economy, now is an opportune moment to contemplate these investment avenues.
People believe their currency has the worth it does because they have no other option. Even in a hyper-inflationary environment, individuals must continue to use their hyperinflationary currency since they likely have minimal access to other currencies or gold/silver coins.
Inflation is gradually going to become part of us and due to that fact any money you keep in cash or in a low-interest account declines in value each year. Investing is the only way to make your money grow and unless you have an exceptionally high income, investing is the only way most people will ever have enough money to retire.
I agree, that's the more reason I prefer my day to day investment decisions being guided by an advisor, seeing that their entire skillset is built around going long and short at the same time both employing risk for its asymmetrical upside and laying off risk as a hedge against the inevitable downward turns, coupled with the exclusive information/analysis they have, it's near impossible to not out-perform, been using my advisor for over 2years+ and I've netted over 2.8million.
Interesting Josh. I think this is something I should do, but I've been stalling for a long time now. I don't really know which firm to work with; I feel they are all the same but it seems you’ve got it all worked out with the firm you work with so i surely wouldn’t mind a recommendation.
Colleen has the appearance of being a great authority in her profession. I looked her up online and found her website, which I reviewed and went through to learn more about her credentials, academic background, and employment. She has a fiduciary duty to protect my best interests. I sent her an email outlining my objectives and also booked a session with her; thanks for sharing.
The frenches are totally right in putting thr people above the profit. In Italy we have salaries stuck to 2000 level and prices are far higher than in France.I often go to France for leisure, they have lower prices than Italy,,,and far higher wages
I'm currently living and working in France. I've been here all my life and this video is just overboard. Sure like all countries we have problems but compared to the UK we're living in luxury.
Not sure if that's true or if it's what TF1 wants you to believe.
This video is so unnecessarily long please value the time of your listeners
The theory expounded in the video is not necessarily pertaining to France alone, but a lot of other countries. It is, in fact, general consensus among people who have studied Economics. France is just one country which is grappling with the consequences among many others.
Its so so sad that being pro worler and focusing on a higher standard of living is bad for countries
You missed one good 3rd option at the end, France could also shift the tax burdon more towards wealth tax on multimillionairs and reduce (or at least don't increase) income tax.
one thing alot of people dont talk about with the fine edge between profit and nonprofit in companies is the amount that CEO, shareholders and high salary effect on the margines. im sure that most companies could cap their payceeling at 100k euros a month and be more profitable. greed is the number one destroyer in the market.
A new subscriber. Finally, a channel that tries to explain the economies of different countries to viewers with IQ's of over 80.
I feel like this video implies so many problems, but does not really show hard data for the claimed problems. Maybe one or two concrete examples of some state enterprises and how they’re not optimally using resources would have been nice. Also the historic claims seem too vague and not grounded on proper historical analysis, but I may be corrected on those.
it's because it's all bullshit
there are no big state companies in france anymore
not more than in any country other than usa
You're analysis of labor, miss the role of capital. You assume no changes in the profit of capital. France has increased the rate and profit of its biggest companies over the past years has grew exponentially. So basically more and more of the added value is given to capital (which only a tiny amount is reinvested in the economy) and relatively less to labour. Highering wages by taking on capital profit, would not lead to inflation.
Per MMT, sovereign currency states fund themselves via deficit. Gov spending grows money supply (credit). Countries in the EU kinda can’t quite the same way the US , UK, Japan or China can.
I’m surprised MMTers aren’t all over EE. I remember you from Steve Keen &Friends. I was a guest in December on the show
France has been around for 1500 years and has survived many crisis through its history, while being the nation who brought the most innovations to the modern world. Still today its quality is unmatched in areas like aeronautics, TGV s, ship building ...and .military equipment not to mention culture , history, gastronomy... So I would not worry too much about France future.
Something feels off when a system that puts employment above all else cannot function without artificially creating “losers.”
Inflation only happens due to money printing. If you stop printing money thus inflation isn't possible.
The thing is that the other advanced economies that you are mentioning are also living beyond their means (the US, the UK, other European countries or even some south American and Asian countries) and many of them more than France lol Therefore are they much better?
Some of them have even more insane budget deficit that just fuels more inequality and transfer of wealth to the rich.
The recession wouldn’t be that had on us if only most people took out their time and finance to venture into investment opportunities, most people live in comfort of savings which won’t cover up for much on this recession
You are right.!
Would be interesting to overlay how a shared currency (across borders with very different countries),impacts the economy and the economic actions a country can take.
Forbidden domain for mainstream economists, you won't get popular with TPTB that way :)
seems like even British people forget. It is properly called "The British Industrial Revolution", for a reason. All others followed on. Took the British 200 years to accomplish this. Took America 70 years and the Chinese about 50. Always easier when you have a blueprint.
NAIRU + Unemployment being Human Misery in all measurable domains (health, wealth, child upbrining, etc.) = Economists think some (millions of people) have to suffer for capitalism to work well (which means for the rich to cumulate more wealth);
"other countries are willing to work harder" ... the countries being those were workers have no social, civil and often even basically human rights?
Why coulnd't France tax wealth (not income, wealth) to support the system? Why is it the workers that have to pay the toll and not the rich?
Yes, yes.
I would love to see a Richard wolf response to those mentioned parts
cause the rich just relocate to a new country that doesnt tax the rich. That is exactly what france tried to do with it 70% tax on the rich when Hollande was president. they all just left
This is precisely not the answer, neither for the rich or the middle-class. The primary metrics for consideration are healthy competition and increasing worker productivity. You don't want to do anything that would lead to brain drain or reduced capital investment in your nation or these two key metrics will be on the decline, along with the general quality of life. The ideal scenario seems to be full employment without inflated wages and prices. A market of competitively priced goods where demand for goods and the labour to make it are high seem like the best of both worlds, as the purchasing power of wages will adjust to whatever the nominal value of their wages are while allowing the worker to benefit from the increased competitiveness of their nation.
Because every single country that's tried has seen capital flight and brain drain in unprecedented scale. Including France itself during Hollande.
And no, the countries that benefit the most from that sort of thing do have human and civil rights, often moreso than a country whose State apparatus has grown to the size necessary for wealth taxation to work-countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom were the main beneficiaries of Hollande's screw up, not Chad or Congo. Much like in America it was Chile and Panama that benefitted from it during Venezuela's Chávez, not Nicaragua.
The problem with your analysis is that you see the economy as only two big blocks: "workers" and "the rich", and thus believe anything that positively impacts unskilled workers cannot also negatively impact skilled workers, or viceversa. And no, economies cannot sustain themselves on unskilled workers alone, that's the whole danger of brain drain.
Why does higher wages equal bad economy?
The wage based inflation argument is absent any critique of the capital class. Why should only the workers lose money? Why cant the capital class just make LESS profits?
Companies don't NEED to hire more employees. They dont NEED to expand. You are assuming perpetual growth is the only acceptable outcome while arguing for inefficiencies in public services.
Does not compute
It doesn't. Lots of high wage countries have good economies. However less productivity per worker equals bad economy. The main issue that France has is that people are demanding more goods and services than their economy can produce (due to aging workforce, government intervention, etc). Because their economy is less productive (for a variety of reasons), the supply can't keep up with demand, which causes inflation. You can't just force people to demand less good and services, because they'll complain that their quality of life is going down, and you can't force people to produce more goods and services, because they aren't slaves and they have the option of leaving to a country that's more productive and can pay them more.
Also more economic output doesn't mean a better life. YOU have brought up that chart several times about how past a certain dollar amount your life doesn't really change. Maybe the message should be that we have done to much in the economy and just need to hold things stable until a new technology comes along that needs us to keep pushing.
I have lived in France for 50 years and the quality of life here is great.
Good food, beautiful landscapes and good jobs.
"c'est la vie is over"
dolce vita is over. c'est la vie is technically forever
*Such is Life*
correct?
The UK voted to leave the EU in 2016. Since then investment, especially Foreign Direct Investment and exports have plummeted. No surprise there. But last year it overtook France to become the world’s seventh largest exporter of manufactured goods. How is that possible?
Good question
I don't think that's quite right - UK services exports are at an all-time high - £472 billion.
Studying economics without considering the currency in which they operate give you a pale reflection of the reality of what is going on
Interesting - So last week I thought of the Tour De France. I figured bicycling must be very popular in France. It has a gentle climate and a beautiful countryside. My next assumption was that bicycle manufacturing must be rather extensive in such a country. Your video of French artisans being prolific in France would also lead credibility to their being many who craft fine bicycles. My brief internet search showed that there used to be a lot of French bicycle manufacturers. However, they have either left to manufacture elsewhere or closed down their shops. Does this exemplify what was discussed in this video? Was my search wrong?
I believe it does
Nowadays production happens wherever it's cheapest and easiest, which is different than where cycling is popular. Seems like countries like Cambodia, Vietnam and Portugal are among the top exporting countries and I doubt cycling is wide spread there.
@@dazzlebreak4458 It seemed like there were still a lot of small bicycle manufacturers in Italy too for some reason. You are right that bicycles are a commodity product that can be made where lower priced labor will be available. So, I suppose the pay is better in France.
THE MFG WILL ALWAYS MOST OF THE TIME SEEK LOWER COST LABOR,
17:45 I am from Greece , a country that was notoriously living beyond it's means (in a different way) before the 2008 financial crysis ...
We have learned from the mistakes of the past throiugh a painful decade of economic crysis (2009-2019) and now we are improving rapidly, after having gone through some unpopular but necessary radical reforms
The situation in France is very different but is equally unsustainable to pre-2008 Greece ... I just hope that the reforms Macron is implementing are enough to avoid a huge crash, because the way I see it , they are just a bandaid compared to what needs to be done , slowing down instead of fixing the problem ... and seeing the insane reactions of the people for even the tiniest of these necessary reforms (which remind me of our anti-austerity movement and the massive protests for the necessary but painful reforms we had to make ) , doesnt give me enough confidence
At least France is trying to change course before the big crash , which is a lot more than Greece was doing pre-2008, which was to pretend there was no problem and only start to make the painful changes when we were already down , which is why our crysis lasted as long as it did
Their real problem is no how much time they have off. It's declining birthrate. The loss of future workers is why they can't pay those generous pensions.
You could use the example of SNCF, the train company. Who has kept a monopoly for decades and the quality has decrease as the price increase.
I took the train in England… I saw Last Week Tonight on the train situation in the US…
Those were far worst situation than what an own state situation did… capitalism leading to monopoly and profit going to shareolders before consumers is not working that well…
Privatization and removing vertical integration is what is causing SNCF to be anything but a laughing stock. Explain to me how having sub contracts is cheaper than just hiring the labor directly ?
@@gamingyann1769 thats a good point.
But as the video said. The French state create companies on key sectors. Now, that there is a rail infrastructure, they should open the gates for other companies, as they did in many other countries.
I should look up more information about the USA situation, the lobbying is strong in this one. Thats one of the key weaknesses of our occidental democracies.
I grew up in France. The SNCF train system had downsides (mostly politically motivated strikes and some undue worker benefits), but it serviced the entire country (including small towns), trains were NEVER late, ticket prices were stable and transparent. Since the EU forced the breakdown of SNCF under "free market" pretenses, trains are late, a lot fewer towns are serviced, ticket prices follow a marketing mania jigsaw, security and fairness in the trains is at an all time low. These days, corporate cronyism goes under the guise of free market and every EU politician gets a bite.
The moment an economics themed channel accepts an investment related sponsorahip deal, their credibility goes out the window...
In France, the DAILY cost (hotel room, police, lawyers, etc) of keeping an illegal immigrant in a CRA on French territory (€ 690) is higher than the MONTHLY salary of one in three farmers and slightly higher than the pension of a farmer's wife. (Bernard Carayon, Mayor of Lavaur)
Thanks for mentioning that. It is indeed the true biggest problem of France right now. It amplifies every problems.
The police exist anyway. Lawyers are paid by the state anyway, and don't work for one client at a time. A hotel room does not cost 690 euros. Farmers don't get salaries; they're self-employed, and if they are employed, 690 euros is illegal unless they are working part-time. Your claim is nonsense.
@@Sascha5 "paid by the state anyway": do you kknow what a "state" means? ie paid by french people. Not just "A hotel room" cost 690 euros but add police, lawyers, etc. The last part shows that you don't knwow anything of the french peasant !!
You should do a video on the métiers of Artisanats in France. That will give context to how and why France continued to specialize rather than mass produce and why some of the best made items (of all types) are still produced, and will continue to be, in France.
Ah the Philips curve, measured by observation over one period of time using wages in one city in one country. That completely fell apart with stagflation
What does it mean: "C'est la vie is over"? Do you know what "C'est la vie" means?
Yeah imagine a video about the US saying "It is what it is" is over
👍😁
Sounds right to me. It's the equivalent of the "this is fine" meme. Just saying "c'est la vie" and letting things continue as they are is over.
Do Georgism / Land Value Tax already.
Lol. I do hope he investigate it. And I hope someone will advocate for it in the Philippines 🇵🇭.