living in europe privileged or not👍👎

Do you think in France the state is a welfare? Especially in southern states people and governments act like "Why should I care for financial politics, I want what I want"

This is exactly what the problem is. First off, the vast majority of people are economically illiterate. Secondly, most people depend on the state (or feel like they depend on the state) for their income. When pensioners + state workers + people on welfare account for over 50% of the population (~60% in France) you enter a vicious cycle where democracy mechanically turns into a welfare state that is bound to self destroy given enough time.

When you praise democracy, then you should respect a nation's decision, like not forcing them to get later retirement

The people never voted for or against retirement changes, nor were they properly informed about the underlying economic situation. Only vague polls were shared on TV, but you may be right that if they did, there is a chance that they would oppose any changes (because of the 2 reasons I shared above).

Early retirement also has a bunch of benefits, or later retirement comes with its cons. I know that I am very socialist and what I say might trigger the liberal ears of europeists, but when you have 20% of unemployment (2022), especially among youth, then early retirement can be beneficial to your economy, whereas forcing older people in a country in which life expectancy is now decreasing can pressure a little bit less the healthcare system. Not to say that elderies who retires are not necessarily inactive. I found many doing associative activities, or growing food, making a small business just to spend their time. It's not only "I want, I want", it's just that everyone doesn't have to lissten to you dogma, because the same dogmas promotes forms of slavery.

I very strongly disagree with this, as you probably expected me to. The unemployment rate is ~7.5%, it was never even close to 20% (off topic but I can't not point it out).

The French retirement system is utterly terrible, we need to borrow hundreds of billions of Euros every year to pay for pensions because France is the ONLY country in the world where retired boomers have a highest standard of living than their working children. My generation (that means you too) pays double what our parents did back when they worked. The French system is a literal Ponzi scheme that has started to collapse because our parents didn't have enough children, and the problem has only gotten worse. We need to borrow more and more money to pay for social expenses (pensions taking up the biggest chunk) despite having the highest tax rate in the world. This is complete madness. My grand father literally spent more time on retirement than working a job. How can anyone think this is remotely sustainable? Please please take some time to do some research, no one in their right minds can defend the current system that is heavily abusing us.

It's not only "I want, I want", it's just that everyone doesn't have to lissten to you dogma, because the same dogmas promotes forms of slavery.

When the State takes 60 to 70% of your earnings while being unable to guarantee your future, I sincerely feel like a slave. At the end of the day, someone needs to pay, whether it's us or future generations (plot twist: it will be both). This is about numbers, not dogma!

We go sometimes to China but not often because it is also very expensive. Sometimes my dad goes without my mom and me.

I untherstand that @Yue_ but we have now whatsapp and thats good

I untherstand that @Yue_ but we have now whatsapp and thats good

My dad uses WeChat more than Whatsapp. But we need my uncle to be with my grandmom or nothing works bc she is suffering dementia.

And @Etienne you mean with 60% taxes?? I dont pay taxes now if i babysit but if they took 60% of it i have super little left!!!!!!! 🙁

Direct democracy may be a noble invention, but it only works to a limited extent and only under certain circumstances.

One of the reasons is that people decide on things that they actually have neither foresight nor a clue about. There are many lawyers in parliaments who know what is possible and what is not even before a decision is made. If decisions are made too quickly and rashly, these cases usually end up at a supreme court and are then reversed because they violate higher law.

Many people have a lack of knowledge that subordinate law cannot trump higher law or that taxes cannot be used for everything and everyone.

Democracy should of course be transparent so that decisions can be understood, but there are several examples where such a procedure has had consequences. In Switzerland people even got rid off to decide so often be elections (which is also expensive in bigger countries, think about the costs or organizing it!)

- In Berlin, after Schönefeld Airport was closed (because BER was finally finished 😉 ), a citizens' vote was held on what should happen to the now vacant site. The result: Of course the Berliners wanted a huge city park for all kinds of activities, but nobody thought about the fact that a lot of space for housing and apartment blocks would be lost and that no affordable housing could be built!

- In the UK, on the other hand, we have the classic example of how much the media can influence a decision that has far-reaching consequences. On top of that, the media has become a henchman for right-wing parties and England now has massive social problems.

The funny thing is that England then wanted to retain the most attractive privileges without the EU and many free trade agreements have the same contractual text 1:1 as before with the EU.

The point about Greece:

- Germany faced a lot of headwind at the time because the trade surplus was massive. This was not swept under the carpet in Germany and there was a lot of self-criticism of past trade conditions - and not just with Greece. Keyword: “Better don't destroy your own trading partners!”

In the case of Greece, however, there was also a completely irresponsible policy in place, with huge corruption between officials and helpers and the state. This would not have been eliminated without outside influence! The Germans were berated for their austerity ethic; other countries were apparently completely indifferent to the threat of state bankruptcy as long as they had secured their own assets. Similar to Argentina until a few years ago, there was an extreme take-it-or-leave-it mentality. The sale of Greek ports was a consequence of the fact that Greece had to repay loans and, as with other countries, China took advantage of this. Incidentally, this was not only the case in Greece: the same thing happened in Sri Lanka. That's why I always say beware of Xi Jinping: doing business with this man is like making a pact with the devil!

The people never voted for or against retirement changes, nor were they properly informed about the underlying economic situation. Only vague polls were shared on TV, but you may be right that if they did, there is a chance that they would oppose any changes (because of the 2 reasons I shared above).

I very strongly disagree with this, as you probably expected me to. The unemployment rate is ~7.5%, it was never even close to 20% (off topic but I can't not point it out).

The French retirement system is utterly terrible, we need to borrow hundreds of billions of Euros every year to pay for pensions because France is the ONLY country in the world where retired boomers have a highest standard of living than their working children. My generation (that means you too) pays double what our parents did back when they worked. The French system is a literal Ponzi scheme that has started to collapse because our parents didn't have enough children, and the problem has only gotten worse. We need to borrow more and more money to pay for social expenses (pensions taking up the biggest chunk) despite having the highest tax rate in the world. This is complete madness. My grand father literally spent more time on retirement than working a job. How can anyone think this is remotely sustainable? Please please take some time to do some research, no one in their right minds can defend the current system that is heavily abusing us.

Yes, I expected it from you. The 7.5% is the government numberes which, liek many statistics, is heavily twisted to fits a narrative. The situation is far worse than that and 20% is a sensational, yet better estimate in my opinion as it takes into account people that are working 1h a week and definitely need a "real" job.

For the French retirement system, there are indeed things to change, notably boomers getting more than workers, yes, or people who are 150 and still getting welfare, boomers who lives in Thailand, Portugal, Morocco... with our money without participating to the life of the country at all. However, the projections regarding the deficit highly vary... the Conseil d'Orientation des Retraites (COR) for instance was much more optimistic and talking about benefits still. I think both should be then taken with a grain of salt and reexaminated better, for making people working longer and giving Blackrock the keys of our wallet might be of different interests than the nation's interests, especially when its pushed by the EU, governed by lobbyists.

There are also much more important topics than this one in my opinion. Working on fiscal fraud, job market, commercial balance and social fraud might be better angle to get back some money than hitting on the retirees. I would argue than spending money in EU and Ukraine is also more worrying than spending on our boomers who stay within the borders. Same for trying to save europe, our banks (this will definitely cost us our savings and the legacy we might expect if our boomers are not spending it all in Costa in the next years if nothing is done and considering the very worrying signs).

So yes, there are definitely problems with our beloved boomers and retirement, but maybe not as big as we pretend. Furtermore, maybe France would benefits more from spending more money in investment than just cutting everything everywhere like it is doing now, but that's again developping more and pushing forward the idea that we see our country specifically falling behind, while remaining extremely arrogant.

When the State takes 60 to 70% of your earnings while being unable to guarantee your future, I sincerely feel like a slave. At the end of the day, someone needs to pay, whether it's us or future generations (plot twist: it will be both). This is about numbers, not dogma!

Well, you have a point here. However, 2 things:

1 - Do you expect the money saved on boomers to come back to your pockets? I don't. I'd rather see it more work for our genius leaders, more contemptuous look from them (they are genius and got to their position because they are higher beings after all), less rights, less money. "Vous ne posséderez rien et vous serez heureux " as a one said.

2 - I honestly wouldn't feel anything bad to see my earnings taken away if, and only if, it was well spent and not, well, because it's a hot topic, given to a country I have nothing to do with. I think it's even quite nice for French, and I include me here, who need to be babysitted for so many things.

Direct democracy may be a noble invention, but it only works to a limited extent and only under certain circumstances.

Representativity has never been democracy and it was ackowledged not later than 1789 already. The Bourgeois who made the Revolution in France knew very well that and wouldn't have given democracy to the peasants who don't think well.
Funny that you agree with that perspective.

Democracy should of course be transparent so that decisions can be understood, but there are several examples where such a procedure has had consequences. [...]

EU is everything but transparent. France even goes directly against the vote of people, and so does EU. There is not even a thing near democracy here, but straightforward oligarchy.

A thing I love with defensor of democracy is that democracy is nice, until it is not because it goes against my values. Like I said, people have the rights to put chains to their own feets if they want to. What you are defending here is not democracy, but representativity, which is a form of oligarchy. Else, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was a democracy, because the king was elected?

In the case of Greece, however, there was also a completely irresponsible policy in place, with huge corruption between officials and helpers and the state.

Yes, but who gave them the example that euro was a magical currency? Again, France and Germany, with Chirac and Schröder. It's easy to say that there is some self criticism saying how your country bloodsucked Greece while, later, just refusing to save that country, giving it to China, and keep vampirizing the South with Euro. We can all do that "Yep, I scammed you, but I really feel bad about it" * hands in your pockets* "No, really, I see my wrongs here" *hands in public's pockets*.
It's not Greece that accepted itself in Eurozone by loosening the recquirements. It's not Greece that gave access to low interest easy accessible credits and it''s not Greece that first violated the "3% deficit limit", but France and Germany. When the "models" and "anchors" of EU act like that, they can't ask why Greece happens later.

The Germans were berated for their austerity ethic; other countries were apparently completely indifferent to the threat of state bankruptcy as long as they had secured their own assets. Similar to Argentina until a few years ago, there was an extreme take-it-or-leave-it mentality. The sale of Greek ports was a consequence of the fact that Greece had to repay loans and, as with other countries, China took advantage of this.

No, that's rewriting history. EU and Germany refused to help Greece at all despite the problems coming not only from Greece and posing serious threats. I have a hard time to believe that Eu leaders didn't know how things would turn when China has been defined as an enemy and knowing its modus operandi. Debt trap diplomacy was already in effect in Africa if I remember correctly.
it's too easy to blame it all on Greece when France and Germany themselves had irresponsible management of their economy and EU abandonned Greece to China.

DOGE in the US also noticed the 150 years thing and the reason was quite mundane (which led to massive criticism of what clueless people want to fire civil servants on a grand scale):

In the US (maybe also in France), the billing system is often still written in the Cobol programming language and dates back to the 60s or 70s.

If a date of birth is missing in this system, the system takes a default date from 1887, which explains the old age. Unsuspecting people then assume that people who are 150 years old are receiving a pension.

DOGE in the US also noticed the 150 years thing and the reason was quite mundane (which led to massive criticism of what clueless people want to fire civil servants on a grand scale):

In the US (maybe also in France), the billing system is often still written in the Cobol programming language and dates back to the 60s or 70s.

If a date of birth is missing in this system, the system takes a default date from 1887, which explains the old age. Unsuspecting people then assume that people who are 150 years old are receiving a pension.

When your 150 years old pensioners are living in Algeria by hundreds, it''s difficult to blame a programming language only.

Yes, I expected it from you. The 7.5% is the government numberes which, liek many statistics, is heavily twisted to fits a narrative. The situation is far worse than that and 20% is a sensational, yet better estimate in my opinion as it takes into account people that are working 1h a week and definitely need a "real" job.

There is some truth to this but you still can't make up some inflated number and declare it as fact 😛

the Conseil d'Orientation des Retraites (COR) for instance was much more optimistic and talking about benefits still.

The COR's latest report shows the system is currently in deficit and will be until at least 2070. Besides, erratum when I said "we need to borrow hundreds of billions of Euros every year", I meant to say it costs hundreds of billions every year and we also need to borrow money on top of that, not that the borrowed amount is hundreds of billions (it is "only" 8 billions). I'm not sure I understand what you meant with Blackrock?

There are also much more important topics than this one in my opinion. Working on fiscal fraud, job market, commercial balance and social fraud might be better angle to get back some money than hitting on the retirees.

For sure, but these are not mutually exclusive. Yes the topics you listed have a higher moral priority, but the sheer size of pensions (~360B Euros) is much greater than everything you mentioned combined.

1 - Do you expect the money saved on boomers to come back to your pockets? I don't. I'd rather see it more work for our genius leaders, more contemptuous look from them (they are genius and got to their position because they are higher beings after all), less rights, less money. "Vous ne posséderez rien et vous serez heureux " as a one said.

2 - I honestly wouldn't feel anything bad to see my earnings taken away if, and only if, it was well spent and not, well, because it's a hot topic, given to a country I have nothing to do with. I think it's even quite nice for French, and I include me here, who need to be babysitted for so many things.

This is depressing, it shows that you (just like many other people) have essentially given up and accepted your fate as a slave of the System. You have no faith in this mad machine, and rightfully so, but still have this glimmer of hope that one day you will get robbed for a good reason. Spoiler: it will never happen, it can't happen.

This is the socialist lie, they take more and more and pretend they will take care of you so you get to live in paradise. This couldn't be farther from the truth and it is literally the definition of becoming enslaved. A slave to a system in which you have no say in any of your life choices because it has granted itself the right to be your tutor, because it "knows better than you" (as you previously noted). 22% of people now work for the state, an absurdly high number that keeps on growing. None of these people create raw value. This machine will keep feeding itself and bloating indefinitely, because that's an organic side effect of any large organization. A computer needs to reboot once in a while, or a private company needs to resort to layoffs every few years, but the state never does. It is never forced to, as there is no accountability. It is terribly unhealthy because there is no correlation with the economy. It is your ultimate Terminator mommy, enveloping you in an ever-tightening embrace until it finally shields you from the dangerous light of day.

DOGE in the US also noticed the 150 years thing and the reason was quite mundane (which led to massive criticism of what clueless people want to fire civil servants on a grand scale):

In the US (maybe also in France), the billing system is often still written in the Cobol programming language and dates back to the 60s or 70s.

If a date of birth is missing in this system, the system takes a default date from 1887, which explains the old age. Unsuspecting people then assume that people who are 150 years old are receiving a pension.

These assumptions aren't true, for different reasons. It is exclusively due to fraud (and human incompetence), these systems aren't to blame.

@Etienne, @Lianshen and @TierM38: i am curious if you MUSTTTT live in another country than where you live now. What do you choose? Because if there are things that you like or dont like about Europe or France or other countries, I am curious what do YOU think is the nicest country to live in the whole world? 🙄🙄

You can not answer this question easily, because every country has a weakness.

But my favourites are Finland, Canada and Norway.

You can not answer this question easily, because every country has a weakness.

But my favourites are Finland, Canada and Norway.

i understand that every country is maybe not perfect. but why do you choose Finland, Canada and Norway? if i would be in Norway i would first go to @Annika2007!! 😛 😛

@Etienne, @Lianshen and @TierM38: i am curious if you MUSTTTT live in another country than where you live now. What do you choose? Because if there are things that you like or dont like about Europe or France or other countries, I am curious what do YOU think is the nicest country to live in the whole world? 🙄🙄

I've been asking myself this question a lot recently. Probably Switzerland or the US.

I've been asking myself this question a lot recently. Probably Switzerland or the US.

Is it bc you are très disappointed about France recently? Or because those two countries are the nicest or both? And do you really think about moving?

I don't know if I'll end up moving but I'm thinking about it yes. Just because you want to move somewhere doesn't mean it's easy though 😛

Many people think that living in europe has more advantages. Is that true? Are the costs high? What about taxes? Weather? Hospital? Work? Let me know how it is in your country?forum: @Pennarossa2024, , @NILU1234, @Etienne, @Simone724, @mayuuram, @Sarahsalah27, @Esma-Nur, @Annika2007, @Emmiiii_17_11, @Miss_Penpal, @Sabri_KC, @allstarcheer, @martutuni, @Roseeeee, @-Kiki-, @Txya, @Lianshen, @LandRoverDiscovery2 @Esma-Nur @Yue @TierM38

It definitely is, as a latinamerican. But in Argentina we also have public education, public healthcare system, public transportation… there are just little details in everyday life that makes Europe so much more privileged.

There is some truth to this but you still can't make up some inflated number and declare it as fact 😛

Those numbers aren't made up, but use another defintion than just class A unemployments. This defintion, used by the government, in particularly misleading as the class A is artificially lowered by kicking people from France Travail or redirecting them to class B, C, D...
There are other twists of statistics that result in underestimation of unemployment in France, but for short, and more accurately, 20%+ of the population is registered to France Travail, and the 7.5% of class A also seems to be underestimated and closer to 9.5% (notably because boomers are also pushed to stay on the work market that are not well accounted), hence 2 more points than officially anounced, with a sharp rise since a few months (showing, again, the failure of Macron's mandat).

The COR's latest report shows the system is currently in deficit and will be until at least 2070. Besides, erratum when I said "we need to borrow hundreds of billions of Euros every year", I meant to say it costs hundreds of billions every year and we also need to borrow money on top of that, not that the borrowed amount is hundreds of billions (it is "only" 8 billions). I'm not sure I understand what you meant with Blackrock?

I admit that what I have about the COR might be a little bit outdated. There was indeed a deficit expected, but it doesn't seem so important. Yes, its a few billions, and up to 13% of the GDP, yet it should aslo decline with time according to projections. Of course, a lot of those are "if" with the COR, and depends on many factors like productivity, from my understanding, but I think it's nothing as alarming as some other fields and needs adjustments rather than a rework. Unfortunately, from my perspective, the current trend is only going to punish the poorests of us and won't adress the problems like frauds or abuses.

Blackrock is maybe a shortcut and incoherence from my part. It was a beleifs spread alogn with the reform. Capitalizing the retirement system leading to such outsider to take care of our capital, in the hope to retire nicely someday.

For sure, but these are not mutually exclusive. Yes the topics you listed have a higher moral priority, but the sheer size of pensions (~360B Euros) is much greater than everything you mentioned combined.

You could say the same with healthcare or the whole welfare system, but here, I think we have core divergence. I don't think that completly changing the system here is desirable nor even needed. For pensions, yes, you are around 360 billions spent per year, but if you fight the frauds and cut it to retirees who live abroad, my gut feelings is that you could already save a good 10-20 billions per year. If you cut pensions above 2500€, or even 2000€, to make it more reasonable (starting from the idea that rich salaries had way enough time to get an extra capital), then you could again save a few billions.

It's just "if", hence hypotheses. However, having only adjustments would likely decrease the spendings by 1 or 2 points, relative to the GPD, if not more, and would be much more sustainable.

This is depressing, it shows that you (just like many other people) have essentially given up and accepted your fate as a slave of the System. You have no faith in this mad machine, and rightfully so, but still have this glimmer of hope that one day you will get robbed for a good reason. Spoiler: it will never happen, it can't happen.

Surely, I won't say that I am against my retirement plan being cared by the state. If you want to talk about robbery, then, no, I wouldnt' mind a kind to take more money that necessary if he does his job properly. That would be his rightful share. However, it has to work. I really dislike the idea that money is taken to fill the pocket of what is the communism of the riches.

In that sense, I don't want to pay for a hope, I'd sure prefer people to pay (because, as of now, honestly, I dont pay much) nothing than to pay taxes to see the system to fall apart rather than getting what they are due in exchange: proper healthcare, education, science, infrastructures and services. I think it's not dreaming too much too, as it has worked in some ways.

This is the socialist lie, they take more and more and pretend they will take care of you so you get to live in paradise. This couldn't be farther from the truth and it is literally the definition of becoming enslaved. A slave to a system in which you have no say in any of your life choices because it has granted itself the right to be your tutor, because it "knows better than you" (as you previously noted). 22% of people now work for the state, an absurdly high number that keeps on growing. None of these people create raw value. This machine will keep feeding itself and bloating indefinitely, because that's an organic side effect of any large organization. A computer needs to reboot once in a while, or a private company needs to resort to layoffs every few years, but the state never does. It is never forced to, as there is no accountability. It is terribly unhealthy because there is no correlation with the economy. It is your ultimate Terminator mommy, enveloping you in an ever-tightening embrace until it finally shields you from the dangerous light of day.

I disagree with that. Yes, it's a slippery slope we are in when we give so much power and initiative to the state, and I agree that my very personal reason for that is mainly laziness or avoiding personal troubles (any administrative task being a nightmare for me; not only in France, unfortunately); and should be carefully monitored. Still, the retirement system as it used to be was washing off a part of socio-economical inequalities by redistributing the wealth. Healthcare for instance gave access good medicine to people. Education and welfare system in France gave everyone a good chance to success.
I can't spit on that. I have and I still benefit partly of every of those, at least in my family and it's why I think living/being born in France/Europe, at least for a part, is a priviledge. Would it be anywhere else, my peasant/worker descendant ass would have been endebted as a child with the family history,; and that would have only been due to stochasticity, not even from poor money management.

Now for civil servant creating no raw value, what do you exactly mean? No direct contribution to the economy? If so, then I disagree. That''s true for teachers, postme, and many others, although they indirectly contribute, but none of them? We have a whole sector for research & development that produce values, among others...

Many people think that living in europe has more advantages. Is that true? Are the costs high? What about taxes? Weather? Hospital? Work? Let me know how it is in your country?forum: @Pennarossa2024, , @NILU1234, @Etienne, @Simone724, @mayuuram, @Sarahsalah27, @Esma-Nur, @Annika2007, @Emmiiii_17_11, @Miss_Penpal, @Sabri_KC, @allstarcheer, @martutuni, @Roseeeee, @-Kiki-, @Txya, @Lianshen, @LandRoverDiscovery2 @Esma-Nur @Yue @TierM38

We do have the garbage tax, but as far as i can remember we never paid it

@Etienne, @Lianshen and @TierM38: i am curious if you MUSTTTT live in another country than where you live now. What do you choose? Because if there are things that you like or dont like about Europe or France or other countries, I am curious what do YOU think is the nicest country to live in the whole world? 🙄🙄

I don't know what place is the best to live in the world. Grass is always greener elsewhere we say, but often, there are cons everywhere. I pretty much liked Norway and would like to go back there someday for a while, but I dont dislike France (or let's say Brittany more, because this is again different from the Hexagon itself) so much. I'd be glad to live in Brittany still, provided that it doesn't worsen again and again like it does in recent years. Unfortunately, there is few opportunities for me there 🙂

That being said, I know it looks dramatic the way we talk here, but sincerely, it's still much worse in other part of the world in so many aspects.