Can France be Entrepreneur and Socialist at the same time?

To all of you who live in France and claim that life is better in the UK, the obvious response is why then are you living in France?

For those of you who nevertheless believe that life is better in the UK I can assure you that it is not. How do I know? I've spent over 30 years working in the construction and engineering industries both in the UK and the Middle East, for both UK and north American based companies, private and public sector employees. Despite my experience and despite having the highest possible qualifications (three degrees, one from Cambridge, and three professional charterships) I have only recently secured a job with a UK firm (following a three-year spell working in the Middle East away from my family) and only on a part-time contract basis, at a lower grade and significantly lower salary with no long-term job security.

Contrary to the claims of the UK media, Britain has not survived the (largely self-induced) recession particularly well and her economy remains fragile. Despite the huge sacrifices many of us have made, social divisions have continued to grow while the main instigators of the recession have escaped without penalty (their organizations having received massive state subsidies to prevent them failing). House price inflation, particularly in London and the South East, is spiralling out of control, transport and energy costs are amongst the highest in Europe (despite the UK's small size, the concentration of London and the S East, no shortage of cheap and willing labour and despite Britain having benefited from North Sea oil and gas revenues for many decades). Unsurprisingly, food prices also continue to creep up month by month.

Many of those who have managed to enter or re-enter the job market during the last four years now work on zero hours contracts and for pitiful wages (the minimum wage, where paid, is hardly generous when you take account of Britain's spiralling living costs and taxation regime) while many of those who managed to retain their jobs throughout the 'austerity' period (including a large proportion of the public sector) have seen their salaries further decline (in real terms). And for the future, well the NHS is clearly being outsourced while state pensions for those of us yet to retire will be virtually worthless (assuming we live long enough to be able to claim them) and for the next generation probably non-existent. To add to the pain for those yet to enter the job market, the cost of higher education is extortionate (far higher than anywhere else in Europe) but with no evidence of those costs ever being recouped (I predict large scale loan payment defaults in years to come with the taxpayer again picking up the bill). And significant relaxations in planning legislation mean that what little undeveloped 'countryside' remains is now also up for grabs, either for residential development (to cater for second home owners, investment buyers and for those forced to move home every few years because there are no minimum space standards in the UK) or for shale gas exploration/ exploitation (because the UK frittered away its North Sea legacy).

And have you looked at the kinds of jobs that are now routinely advertised? Virtually all of them are sales or marketing in disguise, geared to making money rather than providing high quality services, education or research (the things that really contribute to a high quality of life), and heavily dependent upon either an artificially inflated housing market or public sector contracts.

What the last three recessions should have taught us is that a) the model of continuous economic growth is fundamentally flawed and b) all the Thatcher era achieved in practice was a massive transfer of debt from the public sector to the private sector (the UK has by far the highest level of private sector debt of all G8 countries) which has actually increased economic instability.

The French model may not be perfect (whose is) but it is far more humane and equitable than the British/ American model and has been far less damaging on both the social and environmental fabric of the nation. Reform may be required, but not of the kind imposed in Britain over the last 30 years. We should learn from the past not repeat the same mistakes. Thank goodness countries like France and Germany have resisted Americanization for so long.

I didn't think I could be any more admiring of you Vero until you revealed your bit knowledge and pc days!

France has eternally hovered on the brink, as much the Napoleonic period as anything else in modernity that left the legacy of the bureaucratic system that cannot be tweaked let alone changed. Smith allowedfor wage increases in the short and mid terms through capital accumulation and immovation which is the key point that Malthus, Marx and Ricardo all used in a shared but slightly different version of subsistence-wage theory of labour supply. His visits to France influenced Smith's thesis vastly before the book appeared well over a decade before the revolution.

But things have changed a great deal between then and around 2000 when Fenby finished writing (my copy is 2002, 1st edition). It is easy to point out French unemployment figures as proof of its economic decline. France is the world’s fourth largest recipient of foreign direct investment. Forbes put it top with a 22.2% five year return with Italy next! The USA only has a 11.1% return, exactly half. In the mid-1990s France's multinationals were in third position after the USA and Japan the list of the top one hundred non-financial firms. Now they are second with the USA having 10 and France 9; EDF and Carrefour are both creeping up the ranks two with the former top electricity supplier in the world with $75.5 billion returns up to the first quarter of this year and the latter having gone past Tesco to shadow Walmart closely. Both need a little more expansion, I think two countries each, to be defined as MNCs. That will be done and dusted by the end of next year. With US expansion in the world stagnant that will put France top! That surprises me too, but there we find Smith's 'invisible hand' that guides free markets and capitalism through competition for scarce resources slapping the world in mockery of their overtly free markets.

French unemployment figures are used as proof of economic decline but given the misleading nature of British unemployment figures because of those on workfare schemes, disqualified for many including disingenuous reasons, working part time at below minimum wages on zero hours contracts who earn well below the required subsistent rate thus all off statistical maps, as a pro capita exercise the UK is far worse off. The USA is even worse. One in seven people in the USA is under their own poverty line definition and a similar number depend on food banks. Ultimately, and I am emphatically not defending France in any way, things are not so bad when we look around. Fenby was very close to the reality a decade and a half ago but not now. As for any real comparison with Smith, no way. But then I am not going to pick both up to reread for the hell of it.

That also sums up the USA a bit on the comment before. As for the song text. I can think of several nations where the text would apply, albeit a few key words replaced by others, including Ireland and Scotland very much, Wales even more, to some extent England and the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and most of South America more than any others. It all depends on what you are looking for and how, along with the choice of words, and given we are living here it is all around us.

Ah Peter, they don't need any help from me.

......"off to feed the cats"

The fat cats on Wall St, Norman ?

'On the Brink' written 15 years ago - try and pick the changes!

Interesting that so far not one word has been said about the 'arch-capitalists' America, who in case anyone hasn't noticed have turned their economy round with an indicated 4% growth? Now I suggest that might have some effect on work, and wages and taxes and circulation of money for purchasing, thus stimulating more growth?

It is amazing that Europe seems to be trying to gain growth by non-investment and cutting the supply of money available for business investment, but above all demolishing that most precious of all factors - 'Confidence'. 'Boom & Bust' and/or 'recessions' are indeed normal cycles in business. Periodically we seem to reach a point where we reach and excess of 'good things' and a natural pessimism moves in and then we start to doubt what we have, and how long it will last. Then we start to cut back - sometimes belatedly but the danger lies between 'recession' and 'depression', with the latter being ultimately non-productive in either personal or social terms.

Hollande et al have destroyed (hopefully temporarily) confidence. Think about it, Lawyers pass laws all day and every day in Governments - mostly without having a clue what business is all about. Very little time is spent clearing out the weeds of old or redundant laws, and these things stay in the Statute Books cluttering up all activities and making only Lawyers wealthy. To me Lawyers and Trade Union officials (nowadays) have two things in common - they produce nothing but conflict, and are invariably self-seeking on an individual basis. The latter are more destructive to the recovery of a society than the former - just.

On this site we are largely 'foreigners' trying to judge the French - which apart from being arrogant is pointless as even the French can't do it. I came across this from a singer called Mouloudji (about whom I know nothing, but the name sounds Algerian). This is his summary of what makes him French;

Catholic by my Mother

Moslem by my Father

A little Jewish by my Son

Buddhist on principle

Alcoholic by my Uncle

Neurotic by my Grandmother

Class-less by long-felt shame

Depraved by my Grandfather

Royalist by my Mother

Fatalist by my Brother

Communist by my Father

Marxist by imitation

Double-Dealing like a lawyer

Sensual like a miser

Tough like a soldier

Gentle like a drunkard

Deceived by my better half

Pestered by my Concierge

Hated by my neighbours

Detested by dogs

Atheist, O thanks to God!

then from French Comedian on 'Who are we? Where do we come from? Where are we going?' (sound familiar?)

his answer (personally) was 'I am me, I come from just down the road, and I am now going home'

And we think we can even get near to understanding them? Fat chance! Take them for what they are, and hope that they might do the same to us.

Oh and finally I would suggest that for those who haven't read it, it comes from a Scot even more erudite than Brian(?) called Adam Smith who wrote a book in 1776 that even now is required reading for anyone even remotely interested in Social History and how society functions financially. 'The Wealth of Nations' is a good, and interesting read and not a dry tome on economics, and if a pig-ignorant ill-educated yob like me can say that, I am sure others with greater intelligence would enjoy it - and I believe learn from it.

I doubt if Hollande, Montebourg or Melenchon have even heard of it. Nor too many of those outside of America which may have some significance to where I came in.

Off to feed the cats!

Home was a lovely man, very charming and nice to hordes of small pony-club girls who invaded his house in the Borders - and he had a very good memory because about 6 or 7 years after giving me a prize for knowing a hackamore from an egg-butt snaffle he came to school to dish out prizes (again) & remembered who I was, not that I got one that time.... !

Probably didn't help that Lord Home was probably considered an 'Upper Class Twit of the Year' type figure at a time when more regional accents were becoming vogue. Mr Wilson must have been the right man at the right time for GB, a bit like that nice Mr Mitterand for the french people ? Sir Alec's sort went out with Lord North & 3rd Marquess of Salisbury !

Sounds like Mr Melenchon is just up your street then Steve ?

It all goes to show just how forgettable Alec Douglas Home was. Now there was a political black spot. He managed to have three arch conservatives, Butler, Hailsham and Lloyd opposing him and lasted one year.

I suspect he will do the 'honourable' thing and sneak away quietly in order to avoid recriminations if PS lose, especially if badly. I use the word 'honourable' advisedly since never in the history of politics has anybody as yet done anything whatsoever honourable.

Déja vu or what ?

Valls is the natural successor and the only realistic chance the PS has of winning next time around probably . It will be interesting to see how Mr Hollande will be 'ousted'. Does the equivalent of the1922 Committee exist in the party with the 'Night of the Long Knives' etc etc or is the process more 'laboured' ? (pun intended...)

Yep, now watch Mr Macron do an action replay here!

Wasn't it the wonderful Mr Gordon Brown who insisted his government was going to put an end to the 'boom or bust' system of economy ?

The problem is that he is manoeuvring for a takeover from Hollande in real terms and in time for him to step formally into his shoes for the next election. He and his banker pal Emmanuel Macron are going to try a Blair type boom time no doubt, whereby a bust will inevitably follow, so hang on to your seat.

They haven't ever had it, they had all of the significant theorists in the nineteenth century, bar Dr Marx and Prince Pyotr Kropotkin, and a few practitioners who followed Robert Owen's model, then zilch. They have been rhetorically been trying to recapture that all since. Hollande is not only in the last chance saloon but is the worst of somebody with a capitalist leaning who moved left and ended up neither fish nor fowl creating a total mess. The worst of it is that UMP and FN are equally unambitious and see money as something that revolves around in the circles that have it, reluctantly paying the proles to do a bit of work to earn them more to hide overseas. Sarko and Le Pen are as much socialists as Hollande. However, name a country that is actually different? All the differences are superficial. That is what actual makes Merkel stand out and she is under really heavy pressure right now according to this week's Der Spiegel who spell it out very precisely.

Socialism has been temporarily suspended in France. The present government is now Liberalist with a few touches of Thatcherism creeping in. Real socialists are not happy bunnies at the moment...

The introduction of a banker into the governmental heirarchy is yet more evidence of a desperate Mr Hollande drinking in the last chance saloon ! How on earth can he survive to the next election ?

Entrepreneurialism isn't really encouraged by any government, whatever the colour and nothing will really change until budding buisinesses are encouraged to take root with more 'friendly' social charges. I know the introduction of micro entreprises etc have improved things but the french system still encourages working on the black which isn't doing anyone any favours...

The Prosecco in Italy is pretty good...

Oh dear, oh dear. Where does that definition of socialism come from? I would dearly like to have a look at it. There is no definition of Karl Marx though. Dr Marx was basically a philosopher who used economic theory. He also used history and early sociological theory extensively. To earn money he did some journalism. On those counts alone he is indefinable, but then being a human being we do not apply any definition beyond that appellation although we might add and an adjective or perhaps an adverb occasionally.

As for the direction you say Europe and the USA are going toward? Be explicit, I am sure some of us would like to know what that is. As for calling France national socialist, especially given the political history of the several nations who developed that political ideology (not just Germany), I do not think even Mme Le Pen would agree with you there.

As for socialism and private enterprise, I suspect you are looking at twentieth century 'communism' which is nothing like socialism as it developed during the nineteenth century which did not at all reject enterprise as long as it offered all round fairness such as fair pay, good working conditions, education, homes and other benefits to those who might have been employed by an entrepreneur. The taking of excessive profits and particularly when that was to the detriment of the workforce who earned it for their 'boss' was unacceptable. Individual and small company or cooperative entrepreneurial ventures were in fact encouraged. However, a few people came along and creamed off some of Dr Marx's specific takes on those things that eventually degenerated into Stalinism which was as despotic and unjust as any other dictatorship by removing the basic freedoms and liberty of real socialism from the people it oppressed.

However, if you can inform me with extensive references I would be very happy to consider your thoughts.