French pension reform censure rejected

[BBhomemaker 5,439]

12 minutes ago, Economy said:

Well for the record I agree with u about taking the nature of the job into account for retirement age, it's just that since governments usually don't the entire retirement age becomes an all or nothing thing usually that doesn't seem to be an option in political debate (and to be fair that would also bring up other complications that would have to get resolved. For example, what if someone worked all their life in a non physical job then at 61 made a switch? Do they get earlier retirement? Or do u put a minimum number of years ppl had to be in it to ensure ppl don't make a last minute switch to cheat the system? Also classifying every type of job and what it falls into could get complicated. There could be grey areas. And what if someone works in a clearly blue collar job but their position is now operating a machine? What then?

So the idea in principal sounds good but it can also become complicated to define and I'm not surprised governments haven't really gone there for the most part tbh

You can raise all those questions, its fair to ask those, that's why we wants to have more debates, more talks, more opinions, and not just rush with that reform. Also once again, why should we follow every others countries way of doing it, we are different people, different ways. But this government don't allow us to even try or think about it. 

12 minutes ago, Economy said:

As for physical constraints. That's definitely interesting. Tho I'd wonder too if there's factors affecting those numbers beyond just the work itself.

For example the population is now disproportionately older (and therefore more likely to have a constraint to begin with)

The article that i quoted you had its opinion on it, if you wanna check :

Spoiler

Work intensification This increase is explained, as labor economist Christine Ehrel explained to franceinfo, by a phenomenon called “work intensification”. It is about the tendency to want to increase the productivity of the employees to have a better output. This is reflected in particular by the increase in rates. A worker who works on the assembly line, for example, will have to go faster and will also have to do more different tasks, delegate less. However, according to Christine Ehrel, the development of robotics and computer science has made it possible to further intensify the work.

 

12 minutes ago, Economy said:

Secondly this is also self reported and more minor constraints may be a grey area that some ppl might report as one while others may not. Ppl in the past had a stronger "though it out" mentality at least here in North America they did. Could a few reports that ppl consider physical restraints not have been self classified as one in the past?

Well idk about America i grew up in France, I'm French, we talk about about France. The values that i cited is our national motto, we fought for those labours rights decades ago, we still fight for it, idk about yall but we do. This study is from the Ministry of labours, its not like its some random reddit post 

18 minutes ago, Economy said:

I'm not disregarding ur study btw. I'm just trying to also look beneath the numbers cuz sometimes the devil is also on the details

The what now ? 

[Economy 42,294]

10 minutes ago, BBhomemaker said:

You can raise all those questions, its fair to ask those, that's why we wants to have more debates, more talks, more opinions, and not just rush with that reform. Also once again, why should we follow every others countries way of doing it, we are different people, different ways. But this government don't allow us to even try or think about it. 

The article that i quoted you had its opinion on it, if you wanna check :

  Hide contents

Work intensification This increase is explained, as labor economist Christine Ehrel explained to franceinfo, by a phenomenon called “work intensification”. It is about the tendency to want to increase the productivity of the employees to have a better output. This is reflected in particular by the increase in rates. A worker who works on the assembly line, for example, will have to go faster and will also have to do more different tasks, delegate less. However, according to Christine Ehrel, the development of robotics and computer science has made it possible to further intensify the work.

 

Well idk about America i grew up in France, I'm French, we talk about about France. The values that i cited is our national motto, we fought for those labours rights decades ago, we still fight for it, idk about yall but we do. This study is from the Ministry of labours, its not like its some random reddit post 

I'm actually in all agreement with ur lastest replies here so nothing much more to add really.

 

10 minutes ago, BBhomemaker said:

The what now ? 

That's an English expression to basically say numbers can mean something else than what they may initially appear if u look at them more closely and why u got the numbers u did

 

For example, here Canada we have a super volatile job market on a month to month basis (because of seasonal jobs, the fact that a few big cities make up most of the market etc)... So u can get very major headline numbers like huge gains or losses and other volatile data as well

 

U could for example loose jobs in January... But all the losses were temporary holiday hires that expired and low paying part times and maybe full time work actually increased...

 

In reversed U could get a massive amount of job gains but most were in low paying part time, and the only full time gains were in public sector in government so if u jumped to the conclusion the economy was booming and companies hiring full force u might get the trend wrong

 

So looking beneath the surface we say "the devil is in the details". The headline number may not necessarily be what it may at first appear

 

Another perfect example is US politicians claiming US unemployment is at a 50 year low. That's actually not true if u look beneath the surface. The US changed its metrology of measuring unemployment in the 1970s I believe it was and it gives the same conditions a lower number. That makes the number total apples to oranges

 

Not saying ur studies conclusions are wrong necessarily. I was merely asking

 

Edited March 17 by Economy

[Ziggy 9,329]

5 hours ago, Dennis said:

Retirement age at 64 is very reasonable compared to other countries. France has a huge fiscal problem and an ageing population. Something has to be done. Either taxes are raised on younger people or push the retirement age a few years. Unless someone has a better solution, please tell me. France already taxes the **** out of the wealthy. What else can Macron do?

It’s about the principle of raising it. Raise it once and they’ll raise it often. You have to fight early fights to not let your rights slip away, something the macron government is dead set on 

[Fuffy 872]

2 hours ago, monstrosity said:

The pension system is in approx 10 billion deficit 

Total made 20 billion profits in a year

lvmh 21 billion in 2022

I get the frustration when people see these figures but they're often judged without considering the macroeconomic context. It's not as easy or sustainable as it may seem to rely on funneling corporate profits to fund the public system and could affect the economy in the long term.

I agree that a small increase is a possible temporary solution, but governments may want to use that card to fund a different system. 

[Reject False Icons 4,081]

I used to do an internship with some French colleagues and we learned each others job laws and well France has resisted very well the hell working laws from the rest of the world, I hope they can continue doing that

[Economy 42,294]

1 hour ago, Ziggy said:

It’s about the principle of raising it. Raise it once and they’ll raise it often. You have to fight early fights to not let your rights slip away, something the macron government is dead set on 

Retirement benefits are not things that keep getting changed around. The same standards tend to stay in most nations for decades at a time

 

Many countries proposed changes because of drastic changes in demographics that doesn't mean they will need to keep increasing it over and over.

 

I do not know how critical Frances system is so I cannot have a strong opinion for it or against it vs other options

 

But regardless of what the best option is I find the argument that u can't let them do it once because it sets a precedence to do it again a rather weak one.

 

If everytime something was no long appropriate and required a change u did not allow it because of the possibility it wouldn't be the only change, u could not change anything ever.

[Ziggy 9,329]

1 hour ago, Economy said:

Retirement benefits are not things that keep getting changed around. The same standards tend to stay in most nations for decades at a time

 

Many countries proposed changes because of drastic changes in demographics that doesn't mean they will need to keep increasing it over and over.

 

I do not know how critical Frances system is so I cannot have a strong opinion for it or against it vs other options

 

But regardless of what the best option is I find the argument that u can't let them do it once because it sets a precedence to do it again a rather weak one.

 

If everytime something was no long appropriate and required a change u did not allow it because of the possibility it wouldn't be the only change, u could not change anything ever.

I’m saying that’s the idea behind resistance. The French state has been systematically making life hell for the working class for decades. Taking any and every opportunity to protest is important for that reason.

to your last point, governments need to earn trust. If they did then the people would feel secure in allowing change. Macron does not by any means have trust from the French people; he’s just no Le Pen. Change is important and difficult but it should only be accepted by real leaders leading with the interests of those the changes would impact. That’s the problem a lot of western governments face. Issues of legitimacy in the eyes of the people they govern.

[Blackout19 6,913]

I need to go back in time, like '40-'50 and never come back to this world 

[Lona Delery 7,161]

2 hours ago, Blackout19 said:

I need to go back in time, like '40-'50 and never come back to this world 

this is the same energy as

super smart

[Oriane 17,747]

For those who say there's no solution, actually, taxing 2% of the wealth of the 42 richest people in France would be enough to solve the problem.

But let's protect these people who will be sooooo lost with 2% less of their huge wealth, and let's f*ck over all the people who struggle everyday to make a decent living and will be dead/unhealthy by the time they hit the retirement age.

[Guillaume Hamon 4,951]

7 hours ago, Economy said:

Part 1: well jobs have changed a lot over the last century. A much higher percentage of people now do jobs that are more mental than physical... And even the jobs that are physical are not as tough as they once were thanks to new techniques and technology...

Imo even if it was a tiny percentage doing physical jobs it should still be considered in a retirement reform and many were forgotten with this one.

Also maybe it varies a lot ( even between rich countries ) but I remember an article saying it wasn't the same working in German or french fabrics since the first were more technology equipped therefore less difficult on the bodies.

7 hours ago, Economy said:

On top of that (I've worked blue collar jobs my whole life) it's not like the older ppl are doing the hardest labour either, most companies and manager I've always seen using common sense with this. You don't give someone who is 62 the job of lifting grills at my warehouse and a healthy 25 year old strong man the job of putting the labels in bottles.

8 hours ago, Economy said:

I feel like if 60 years ago ppl already retired at a certain age and managed... A couple more years now should be doable when fewer ppl do physical jobs and the ppl who do still have it easier than in the past

 

I did remember you worked these like I did and do but we're still young and maybe things will not appear the same way with age.

The example you give works if there's enough young persons to do the hard jobs. Companies are sometimes letting old folks on the tough jobs cause not enough new person comes to do it.

When a boss pay 2k to someone in France he nearly also pay 2k to the state in taxes on this wage... It doesn't help businesses to give better wages so here many tough jobs are payed the minimal wage which push folks to look for softer jobs if it's to be payed the same anyway...

8 hours ago, Economy said:

Part 2: I agree. There's always multiple things to look at, if u can find enough efficiencies to offset the ageing population other ways so u don't have to raise it then great. But I still wonder if low 60s is realistic long term even with wasted spending more in check.

It's a 9 to 15 billion budget hole and we're constantly told by french economic press that way more than that is wasted or stolen each year so folks here believe it would be doable differently.

I think they won't accept a higher age till it's been tried at least.

[Guillaume Hamon 4,951]

4 hours ago, Oriane said:

For those who say there's no solution, actually, taxing 2% of the wealth of the 42 richest people in France would be enough to solve the problem.

But let's protect these people who will be sooooo lost with 2% less of their huge wealth, and let's f*ck over all the people who struggle everyday to make a decent living and will be dead/unhealthy by the time they hit the retirement age.

Damn I didn't know it was only 2% of the 42 richest ones. Imagine some better spent public money and an even lower than 2% tax on the very wealthiest, it's really doable...

But we'll be told we have no other choice by Macron and the next ones like him...

8 hours ago, Economy said:

Retirement benefits are not things that keep getting changed around. The same standards tend to stay in most nations for decades at a time

Sarkozy changed the age of retirement in 2010. Hollande changed the number of working years to get your full retirement pension in 2014. Macron's doing it barely 9 years later and the most popular dude from Macron's party being presented as his successor is insisting to push it till 67 yo while being a heavily rumored candidate for 2027...

That would mean a potential fourth major retirement system change in 17 years here.

Edited March 17 by Guillaume Hamon

[Guillaume Hamon 4,951]

5 hours ago, Reject False Icons said:

I used to do an internship with some French colleagues and we learned each others job laws and well France has resisted very well the hell working laws from the rest of the world, I hope they can continue doing that

We try hard but not hard enough sometimes... Thank you very much! 

[Oriane 17,747]

1 hour ago, Guillaume Hamon said:

Damn I didn't know it was only 2% of the 42 richest ones. Imagine some better spent public money and an even lower than 2% tax on the very wealthiest, it's really doable...

But we'll be told we have no other choice by Macron and the next ones like him...

Yes, they all have connections to rich people + have shares in big companies, no wonder they don't want to disadvantage them.

[BBhomemaker 5,439]

5 hours ago, Blackout19 said:

I need to go back in time, like '40-'50 and never come back to this world 

Yeah sure, let's go back to when women were not allowed to even open a bank account alone or vote or control their own bodies, to when LGBT rights were unexistants and lets not forget WW2, and the Algerian War and...

Edited March 17 by BBhomemaker