French workers fight for the right to be lazy

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Yes, we have working poor instead of unemployed people living off of government money. I'd say that's a more than fair trade.

That's an ideological statement, and it is yours. I personally revile the idea that in rich society such as ours, people can be poor despite working. And if, to avoid such a society, we need strong regulations and generous welfare that will be abused by some, then so be it.

[DanS]

Except our government has no way of knowing who is looking for work, unless they are collecting benefits.

Che: You don't know what you're talking about. They do a survey of households to figure out who is looking for work.

The insured unemployment rate is what you're describing. The insured unemployment rate is something like 2.5% nowadays.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Except our government has no way of knowing who is looking for work, unless they are collecting benefits.

survey - they called me once, i told them i wanted a job and had been looking for one in the last 4 weeks.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
the only effect low wage workers have on the economy is a decrease in costs and prices. having on high wage workers would push prices up, but wouldnt necessairly result in unemployment. only when they can make more by not working then if they had worked, do high educated people choose not to be busdrivers

Well, it's not exactly what's happening you know... Unemployment benefits are definitely not good enough to make up for a high paid job, and they can unly suffice for a low paid job if you have a steady illegal income next to them. Once benefits and, and once you barely live with the survival income (RMI), you can't expect to keep a lifestyle that includes a rented home, for instance.

[DanS]

After consideration, I've come to the conclusion that the French and German workers really screwed this one up.

They should have gone for a 4-day, 32-hour workweek. It makes a lot more sense and is much more irreversible than a 35-hour work week.

Fridays off would have taken in all of the religious days of rest in France.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by DanS
After consideration, I've come to the conclusion that the French and German workers really screwed this one up.

They should have gone for a 4-day, 32-hour workweek. It makes a lot more sense and is much more irreversible than a 35-hour work week.

Fridays off would have taken in all of the religious days of rest in France.

They screwed up? How about us? We never even saw the bandwagon come by our neck of the woods!

[Lawrence of Arabia]

you guys should let in more immigrants, and not put them in that concentration camp you had there a few years ago in northern france (by lille or caen, you know what im talking about.)

les maghrebins (is there an english word for these guys?) would fill in your low income jobs nicely, creating more high education jobs. shortening unemployment benefits (because length is way more signifcant than the amount given. a short higher paying benefit is better for the economy then a longer lower paying one) and that would keep low income workers in the market. like eveerything, it always starts from the bottom.

switzerland, for example, is very expensive, but has very low unemployment. everyone there has very good education, but it is low unemployment benefits that drives everyone to get jobs.

[DanS]

We never even saw the bandwagon come by our neck of the woods!

And we won't in the future because of these dufuses. A 35-hour week was tried but didn't work out.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by DanS


And we won't in the future because of these dufuses. A 35-hour week was tried but didn't work out.

Yeah, Leave it to "old" Europe to screw up a "New" idea.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

i have no problem with a 35 hour week, and 4 weeks of vacation. my own research indicates that they work 20% less then us, but are 20% more productive per hour worked.

that means it works out to the same.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by DanS
They should have gone for a 4-day, 32-hour workweek. It makes a lot more sense and is much more irreversible than a 35-hour work week.

There were many talks about it, but it was deemed an extremistic idea. Unlike the 35 hours workweek, where you cut one hour a day or take the occasional day off, the 4 days workweek implies a very different lifestyle, where almost half of the week is devoted to free time. It's not in our habits, and thus it's not easily accepted.

I'd love it though. Weekends are way too frantic, I'd love to have more time to see the people I love.

[DanS]

Well, we're all suffering from your lack of foresight.

Thanks a lot!

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Spiffor

There were many talks about it, but it was deemed an extremistic idea. Unlike the 35 hours workweek, where you cut one hour a day or take the occasional day off, the 4 days workweek implies a very different lifestyle, where almost half of the week is devoted to free time. It's not in our habits, and thus it's not easily accepted.

I'd love it though. Weekends are way too frantic, I'd love to have more time to see the people I love.

When you guys first went to the 35 hour week, I had hopes that this would eventually lead to a 32 hour/4 day week. Long has this been a goal for American Unions, while seemingly always in the far future. Sadly, this step backwards leaves that dream as nothing more than a passing thought.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

I'd love it though. Weekends are way too frantic, I'd love to have more time to see the people I love.

they dont do school on wednesdays. they do saturday mornings instead, in french primary schools, and junior high (not sure about high school and university)

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
you guys should let in more immigrants, and not put them in that concentration camp you had there a few years ago in northern france (by lille or caen, you know what im talking about.)

Well, that concentration camp was actually for people who transited through France to Britain (Sangatte), and was maintained by the Red Cross IIRC. We have too strict (and pretty useless) laws on immigration, but most of our immigrants don't go to Sangatte, fortunately.

les maghrebins (is there an english word for these guys?) would fill in your low income jobs nicely, creating more high education jobs. shortening unemployment benefits (because length is way more signifcant than the amount given. a short higher paying benefit is better for the economy then a longer lower paying one) and that would keep low income workers in the market. like eveerything, it always starts from the bottom.

To date, most low-qualification immigration comes from subsaharian Africa (especially Mali: Montreuil in Paris's suburbs is one of the biggest Malian cities, where Malian presidential candidates go campaign )
But accepting immigrants en masse is not precisely easy. Housing is already very exapnsive in Paris (where Migrants are most likely to conme), and it's scarce. Additionally, we're having grave integration problems that won't be solved anytime soon. We should clean up our own mess before opening the gates. And then, there's the EU to ponder. If we accept a massive flow of immigrants, it means they'll travel in the EU, and go to countries that don't want immigration.

So, opening the gates to immigration, while fundamentally an idea I support, has quite a few problems.