Ernie, could you explain how that would work in practice without creating an even greater tax burden on those in employment?
Perhaps if we stopped giving tax breaks to the already wealthy that might be a start. Perhaps if we just had a more straightforward tax system where above a threshold everyone paid the same proportion of tax on income wherever it came from. Perhaps removing tax breaks from 'charities' whose main purpose is to perpetuate inequalities.....
We live in a country where people like the Governor of the Bank of England judge other people by the standards of the financial sector and who don't seem to have a clue how any other sector works.
I try and encourage my kids to listen to both sides of an argument before going off on one but British society is encouraged to divide itself into smaller and smaller more tightly defined interest groups with no power or ability to look at the bigger picture. It is probably time to go off on one. Among other reasons the stories the French tell themselves about their revolutionary history seem to give a better underlying sense of society and fairness (even if it can often come with large helpings of xenophobia and bigotry (but then I was born in England so who am I to criticize)).
I've always had a grudging admiration for the French. I respect the fact when you're in the Alps and they're charging you 30 euros for a crap pizza, another 10 euros for a handfull of frittes and 20 euros for a Kronenburg they have the audacity to look affronted, like it's you who's having them over.
It takes some front, that
Ernie -
All that article tells me is that automation and AI will put loads of people out of work. Jobs requiring lower educational levels will be lost, jobs requiring higher educational levels will marginally increase. Then finishes with everyone who loses out to automation can become cleaners or gardeners. So given loads of people would lose jobs which are unlikely to be replaced without a significant uplift in educational attainment, where do they get money to survive without state benefits and additional tax burden on the employed?
It also completely misses the point that automation is very expensive to implement so in real world accountancy any profits are offset against the initial investment for a significant period of time therefore it doesn't generate huge amounts of surplus cash in society.
Richie_B -
I agree that a simple tax regime would be much better. I wouldn't mind everyone paying 30-35% tax on all income above the national living wage.
I also think the state pension and any old age related benefits (heating allowance, bus passes, TV license, etc) should be means tested. I'll have a good private pension when I retire in 26 years. Why should I expect the state to give me more money and benefits when I can live perfectly comfortably on what I have put into my private pension. There are those that will need that support and, barring any major disaster, I won't be one of them so why should I be given money I won't need out the state pot which is there to support those that do need it.
The French (and Brits!) have a lot of things that may be worth some public disorder but, given our life expectancy, having to work 2 years longer isn't one of them in my opinion.
It also completely misses the point that automation is very expensive to implement so in real world accountancy any profits are offset against the initial investment for a significant period of time therefore it doesn’t generate huge amounts of surplus cash in society.
Oh those poor poor companies who are inexplicably forced to sack people and replace them with robots despite the fact that it is really expensive and will eat into their profits.
From what I understand, the French have a strong ethos of holding the government to account and failure to deliver on promises or commitments will result in actual action from the people.
Except that retirement reform was one of the key Macron pledges and they re-elected him, so he's delivering exactly as promised.
Technically it's watered down a bit, it was supposed to be 65, but he compromised at 64....
Oh those poor poor companies who are inexplicably forced to sack people and replace them with robots despite the fact that it is really expensive and will eat into their profits.
That wasn't the point. The point is, automation doesn't generate lots of taxable profit that can be used to bolster the unemployment benefits pot as rightly or wrongly, companies do have the ability to offset any money made from efficiency gains against the cost of the investment.
You're the one that suggested automation is a way to allow people to have more leisure time and to retire earlier. How would this be paid for?
So once again, who provides the people who lose their jobs due to automation with a living wage without further increasing tax of the employed?
Or maybe some of the benefits of far less labour intensive industries due to the ever growing role of new technology should result in more leisure time and shorter working time/lives, instead of just ever increasing profits and greater wealth for an elite few?
Indeedy. With the side benefit that there would be people available to do jobs that are labour intensive but currently short-staffed, like wiping arses and delivering meals on wheels.
A side-moan - I thought that when I retired I’d be able to go to places during the week and they’d be quiet. Not a bit of it - they’re absolutely rammed with other retired people!!
You’re the one that suggested automation is a way to allow people to have more leisure time and to retire earlier. How would this be paid for?
Maybe we need to rethink the concept of wages - if two societies produce the same, but one with machines and one with humans, does it make sense to keep humans working (other than to keep them off the trails I want to ride, obvs)?
Maybe we need to rethink the concept of wages – if two societies produce the same, but one with machines and one with humans, does it make sense to keep humans working (other than to keep them off the trails I want to ride, obvs)?
Well the society with the machines can have the people work as well and achieve an even higher standard of living, which makes the ones without jealous and aspire to have the higher standard too.
Been the same ever since the Industrial revolution.
Why should I expect the state to give me more money and benefits when I can live perfectly comfortably on what I have put into my private pension.
I understand what you are saying and I'm in a similar fortunate position, but people will have been making decisions based on the fact that they will have both the state and private (if they have one) pension income when they retire. So it's the sort of change that you really have to make well in advance so people have time to factor it into their plans.
I wonder if those most aggressively protesting/rioting would be happy with the increased taxes/immigration needed to pay for their pensions in years to come 🤔🤔
As I understand it, French state pensions work very differently to that in the UK. Here everyone pays in and everyone gets a slice paid when they reach state pension age.
In France, there is a generic state pension age but this then varies based on the work you do (bin men have a lower age for example) and you pay in to the retirement fund only for your sector/type of work. So, my brother who is a French lawyer has to rely on there being enough young people going in to law as a profession and paying in to cover his state pension when he retires. Clearly some sectors are at risk (see above) so add the way this works to the increase in age and it gets more problematic.
I was going to post something informed and light hearted, but having just had to wait for that ****ing give us your ****ing money pop up again I thought I'd just râler instead because it's good for my physical and mental health. 😉
Fuel increases a few years back. The Brits took to social media and moaned about it before rolling/bending over and taking it. The French smashed stuff up. From what I can remember, one method was taken notice of by the government and the other wasn't.
Say what you want about the French but I love em.
Fuel increases a few years back. The Brits took to social media and moaned about it before rolling/bending over and taking it. The French smashed stuff up. From what I can remember, one method was taken notice of by the government and the other wasn’t.
I'm not sure it actually makes a massive difference in the end, fuel prices always seems roughly equivalent to ours whenever we drive there.
@stumpyjon, the reason many women were thrust into hardship was the fact that many still had menial jobs or just plain bringing up children and were often in part time jobs, thus not given the chance to have a company pension. Their pensions were expected at the age of 60 and without much warning the pension age was changed and they had to wait many more years. Maybe some couldn't get work at the age of 60 plus and possibly some were just plain tired after years of hard work and bringing up their families.
Not everyone sits behind a keyboard with a good wage and company pension, sadly it's still mostly women who do part time work or have a menial job, such as a cleaner and have low paid work. This has changed a lot in the last decade, but it has affected women who are now in their early to mid 60's.
Edit; @footflaps - we've just come back from France and petrol is quite a bit dearer than in the UK.
The Brits took to social media and moaned about it before rolling/bending over and taking it.
Eh? Refineries were blockaded and the pumps ran dry.
There was also a lot of both tutting and eye-rolling and somebody wrote a letter to the Daily Telegraph in green ink
Not everyone sits behind a keyboard with a good wage and company pension, sadly it’s still mostly women who do part time work or have a menial job, such as a cleaner and have low paid work.
I love the idea that everyone who works with a computer is on a good wage most of the people I know have to tender every job so we’re all on the same race to the bottom (I used to do both and hour for hour I earned more cleaning, although I will admit the hours were out of sync with everyone else’s timetables).
Well the miner's strikes were pretty passionate.
I'm always astonished how the French are so productive. I did a couple of projects and they used amble in around 9ish go home at 4 and have a couple of hours for lunch.
It's not like we spend all day surfing the net over here and engaging in forums...
Our UK pensions were put up from aged 64 to 65 a few years ago
Speak for yourself, my state pension age is 68 if I ever actually get one.
I never quite understood this, it’s not like women (or men) plan thier exact retirement date 20 years in advance and have a carefully calibrated financial plan that can’t be changed to allow them to retire on date X.
There's a whole load of information out there if you choose to educate yourself.
I’m always astonished how the French are so productive. I did a couple of projects and they used amble in around 9ish go home at 4 and have a couple of hours for lunch.
I guess it’s being present versus being productive. Presenteeism (is that a word?) seems rife in the UK. Businesses demanding people be in the office so that they can pretend to work in sight of the management.
Well the miner’s strikes were pretty passionate.
There hasn't been one for nearly 40 years. If that is considered a good example of British passion I rest my case.
Well the miner’s strikes were pretty passionate.
They were, end result wasn't great though, pit closures accelerated, communities ripped apart and families with no income whilst striking. If thats what passion gets you I'll stick to green ink and tutting thank you.
@bunnyhop no still dont get why the pension age going back is such an injustice specifically for women, fully agree women have had it rough over the last 30 years as societies expectations have changed but i doubt many would have actively changed the paths of theirs lives if they had known 30 years ago the pension age would be at 68 when they retired. When I started work people were on final salary pension schemes and retiring at 55, I haven't based my entire retirement plans on that, realisation has dawned over time that's totally unrealistic, in fact I don't have a set retirement time in mind, it will depend on my health, employment situation, state of the stock markets when I cash in my pension pots etc.
It's not a gender equality thing, every working person has been hit by reduced pension expectations and longer working life.
If anything it was pretty unfair that for years women retired earlier and lived longer than men so got significantly more pension.
Bottom line is very few people will get the retirement they were expecting.
A lot of automation is done because it’s difficult to hire someone to do manual repetitive tasks, robots do exactly what they are told and don’t get sulky when the cost of living outstrips wage growth.
Nice. Are you sulky too or are you doing fine than you very much? The factories where I've worked the robots were temperamental shites, thankfully, because at the end of the line were humans still doing extremely repetitive jobs. Glad to be out of it.
Well the society with the machines can have the people work as well and achieve an even higher standard of living, which makes the ones without jealous and aspire to have the higher standard too.
Been the same ever since the Industrial revolution.
bollocks to that! Bring on the robot/AI revolution and I’ll quit work with basic needs met. More time to do fun stuff or volunteering. Life’s way too short for working until you’re too old and knackered to enjoy what’s left of it.
No wonder the King cancelled his visit to France:
"They’re planning on going to Versailles. It does not look good. This seems very 1789.”
Being is Versailles surrounded by angry Frenchmen must be a tad unsettling for any royalty.
Especially if the Tricoteuses start appearing with their knitting.
’m always astonished how the French are so productive. I did a couple of projects and they used amble in around 9ish go home at 4 and have a couple of hours for lunch.
Depends where you are maybe. Where I worked people often stayed till 6 or 7 in the evening.
How much of this is actually about pension reforms? It may well be an unpopular policy but the under-reported (at least in the UK) elephant in the room seems to be the fact that the reform was forced through without a democratic vote.
How much of this is actually about pension reforms? It may well be an unpopular policy but the under-reported (at least in the UK) elephant in the room seems to be the fact that the reform was forced through without a democratic vote.
Absolutely.
the fact that the reform was forced through without a democratic vote.
Wasn't there a democratic vote? I thought there was one in the legislature and it rejected the proposal?
So yeah, the excessive executive powers of the President under the 5th Republic, and its affect on democracy, seems to be an issue.
Melenchon has called for a 6th Republic I believe.
How much of this is actually about pension reforms? It may well be an unpopular policy but the under-reported (at least in the UK) elephant in the room seems to be the fact that the reform was forced through without a democratic vote.
Yep, and the far right are milking it and pouring petrol on the flames.
Wasn’t there a democratic vote? I thought there was one in the legislature and it rejected the proposal?
Not that I can see.. Macron didn't think it would get past the National Assembly (lower house) so invoked Article 49.3 to force it through without a vote.
Ah, I thought that there had been a vote and the proposal was lost which is why Article 49.3 was invoked.
It would be like a UK prime minister pushing through legalisation without bothering to put it to a parliamentary vote because they didn't feel that it would get enough support.
No wonder those Frenchies are angry!
There weren't enough willing Repulicans in the now center right coalition to vote the law through but there were enough Republicans to vote against the no confidence vote and maintain the governemnt in power. So Macron was able to use the 49-3 without the government being forced to resign. The no confidence vote was close, only failing by nine votes so it was clear some republicans who would have voted against the pensions law voted to maintain the government of which they are a part in power.
I voted enthusiasticaly for Macron first time around on the basis of his manifesto and not so enthusiastically as the least worst manifesto second time around. I'm fairly typical of those who voted Renaisance in the last presidential elections, against use of the 49-3 on such an emotive issue and unhappy with the turn to the right Macron has taken.
The protests (not riots) were bon enfant up to the use of the 49-3.
The next elections are going to be interesting. There's a gaping hole where the center left used to be.
My neighbours voted Macron to ensure Le Pen didn’t get in. He doesn’t really have a mandate for his manifesto and the parliamentary elections completed that picture.
Women get a relatively tougher deal in France - friends have to work 43 years to make full contributions so will work to 67 because they took breaks for having kids (not like UK with 35 years only requirement but 67 as retirement age). The pension is better but there’s a big gap between not having full contributions (at 62) and having full contributions. As I understand it.
A sixth republic is not a bad idea. France has always adapted. The current presidential system was de Gaulle’s design and it currently looks dangerous as it’s hard to see the choices being other than fascist or someone you don’t like.
Women get eight quarters of pension points for having one kid, that's seem reasonable. Three kids, jackpot !
My seven years of UK contributions are worth precisely nothing, I'd need ten to get anything.
There's always been someone I could vote for with enthusiasm in the first round. It's only if your prefered candidate reaches the second round that enthusiasm continues.
Having lived under both electoral systems I prefer the French one. It's so far given me a series of leaders that have represented France pretty well on the international stage and broadly managed in my interests at home.
If you think Marine Le Pen is a fascist how do you qualify Maggie, Blair, Boris, Truss, Rishi and King Charles III, Clover? The UK currently has hard right policies Le Pen knows wouldn't be accepted here and has indeed dropped from her programme.
My seven years of UK contributions are worth precisely nothing, I’d need ten to get anything
Can't you pay for missing years? Might be worth doing the maths on that
If you think Marine Le Pen is a fascist how do you qualify Maggie, Blair, Boris, Truss, Rishi and King Charles III, Clover?
I find it interesting how you repeatedly make the point on STW that the far-right in France is no worse than the UK Conservative Party and New Labour Ed.
And today I have learnt that Marine Le Pen is no more fascist than the current UK monarch.
I don't know if this absurd comparison reflects some grudging administration for the leader of the French far-right or a deep resentment of the British. I suspect that it probably a bit of both.
As a naturalised French you seem to exhibit all zealous commitment of a convert.
As a naturalised French you seem to exhibit all zealous commitment of a convert.
And you, Ernie, dive into personal insult all too easily. You spend a lot of your time bigging up the UK for a French national. Pot kettle black even if your original assertion were true.
Read Le Pen's programme and compare it with the statements of Liz truss and Priti Patel. Just be a minimum objective on your criteria for "fascist".
You spend a lot of your time bigging up the UK for a French national.
You mean that I spend a lot of time putting a realistic perspective on things.
I intensely dislike Tony Blair but to compare him with the leader of a party which has since its inception has had racism at the core of its beliefs, and whose founder dismissively described the holocaust as "a detail of history", is patently nonsense.
It has nothing to do with "bigging up" for the UK and everything to with not talking bollocks about Le Pen being no worse than Blair, and bizarrely Charlie Windsor.
And you, Ernie, dive into personal insult all too easily.
Oh you poor thing Ed ....... did you feel personally insulted? For someone who so freely dishes it out you are surprisingly sensitive.
Rule numbber one, Ernie.
I honesly feel that comparing the racist, religiously motivated war criminal Tony Blair with Le Pen is unfair on Le Pen, but there you go.
And dismissing the holocaust is words but Tony Blair sent in an army to kill tens of thousands on a false pretext. Le Pen senior got prosecuted for his words, Tony Blair did not get prosectued. In fact he got knighted. I think that says a lot about the political and judicial systems in the two countries.
British women born in the 1950's were often paid less than their male counterparts, thus being given a lesser pension. Some companies have amended this situation recently, but it left many women out of pocket.
A friend told me that the MALE politician who brought about the rise in women's pension age, then retired at the age of 61 on a very good pension, with a large bonus. Oh the irony.
I think that says a lot about the political and judicial systems in the two countries.
So it isn't just British politicians that you despise but also the British political and judicial system?
Well I am certainly no fan of a system which concentrates political and economic power in the hands of a wealthy elite but I remain unconvinced that the French model represents a dramatic improvement over the UK.
Judging by your constant criticisms you presumably believe that as a French national it is my patriotic duty to 'big up' France's political and judicial systems.
However despite believing in the unquestionable superiority of French cheese I struggle to big up a system in which the far-right are repeatedly on the verge of winning presidential elections, and with it the enormous executive powers bestowed by the 5th Republic.
You clearly have some admiration (not administration!!) for Le Pen Ed, when she and her father are compared to UK politicians.
But despite your dismissive comments I reckon this description encapsulates perfectly what we are talking about:
National Rally, previously known as National Front, is a far-right political party in France with a decades-long history of Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, racism, xenophobia, homophobia, and misogyny. National Rally has enjoyed electoral success locally, nationally, and in the European Parliament. Throughout its history, the party has been dominated by the Le Pen family, especially Jean-Marie Le Pen, a Holocaust denier and apologist of French colonialism, and his daughter, Marine Le Pen, who advocates religious discrimination against Muslims, immigrants, and migrants.
I am happy to accept that Marine Le Pen has moved away from her father's anti-semitism and now focuses more on islamophobia, like many UK far-right organisations such as the English Defence League have done.