On the French Labour Law Protests
I didn't intend to write on this topic, but then I've been reading some books that made me think that France is an excellent example of what is wrong with the modern democratic (republican or parliamentary) system. Canada and other western countries can learn a lot from France, because France is doing things the wrong way.
First of all, I find it fascinating that France ended up where it has. During the 19th century, France produced some of the best economic and political thinkers. The problem is, they chose to follow the bad ones (like the Comte de Saint-Simon).
During the 19th century, Frederic Bastiat and Alexis de Tocqueville wrote on democracy and freedom, and how both were important to the well being of a nation and it's people. By the end of the 19th century, there were two basic economic theories: The laissez-faire free markets describe by Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations in 1776, and Marx and Engels' Communist Manifesto of 1848. In 1944, Freidrich Hayek described (in The Road to Serfdom) that socialism differed little from the ideas of Marx and Engels. Reading Hayek today, one sees that while the socialism he feared (government control and operation of industry) was taking hold of Britain at the end of the Second World War didn't last long, the socialism of government regulation that has supplanted it has had exactly the same effect. This is pointed out very clearly in Milton Friedman's 1994 preface to Hayek's master work.
So back to France. Hayek pointed out clearly in The Road to Serfdom that the National Socialism of the Third Reich differed little from the state-run enterprises of Soviet Russia. France observed this first hand during the German occupation from 1940-44. But they failed to learn from it.
France is one of the most over-regulated places on earth. The French government and it's labour laws (and other industry-killing policies) are the primary reason why unemployment in France is so high, particularly amongst young workers and immigrants. Bastiat and de Tocqueville warned against government intervention, and Hayek did an excellent job describing how government regulation can reduce the standard of living of a nation's residents.
What France needs is a President and Prime Minister who have the wherewithal to apply the positive economic policies of Hayek (as Thatcher did for the UK in the 1980s). Get the government out of areas where the government can do no good.
First of all, I find it fascinating that France ended up where it has. During the 19th century, France produced some of the best economic and political thinkers. The problem is, they chose to follow the bad ones (like the Comte de Saint-Simon).
During the 19th century, Frederic Bastiat and Alexis de Tocqueville wrote on democracy and freedom, and how both were important to the well being of a nation and it's people. By the end of the 19th century, there were two basic economic theories: The laissez-faire free markets describe by Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations in 1776, and Marx and Engels' Communist Manifesto of 1848. In 1944, Freidrich Hayek described (in The Road to Serfdom) that socialism differed little from the ideas of Marx and Engels. Reading Hayek today, one sees that while the socialism he feared (government control and operation of industry) was taking hold of Britain at the end of the Second World War didn't last long, the socialism of government regulation that has supplanted it has had exactly the same effect. This is pointed out very clearly in Milton Friedman's 1994 preface to Hayek's master work.
So back to France. Hayek pointed out clearly in The Road to Serfdom that the National Socialism of the Third Reich differed little from the state-run enterprises of Soviet Russia. France observed this first hand during the German occupation from 1940-44. But they failed to learn from it.
France is one of the most over-regulated places on earth. The French government and it's labour laws (and other industry-killing policies) are the primary reason why unemployment in France is so high, particularly amongst young workers and immigrants. Bastiat and de Tocqueville warned against government intervention, and Hayek did an excellent job describing how government regulation can reduce the standard of living of a nation's residents.
What France needs is a President and Prime Minister who have the wherewithal to apply the positive economic policies of Hayek (as Thatcher did for the UK in the 1980s). Get the government out of areas where the government can do no good.
posted by Technical Bard | 15:44
4 Comments:
Here's the problem with your hypothesis; you assume that a president and prime minister would have the ability to implement economics reforms if they had the desire to do so.
Unfortunately, given the control of the EU and the EMU, the control over many fiscal and monetary policy tools has been removed from the individual nations, and placed into the collective control of the committee. And as they say, the camel is a horse designed by committee.
I'm actually in france right now, and it's interesting to hear from people with many different views on the issue. Not all french people are communists, but there sure are a lot of them socialists over here.
The EU and EMU do provide the governments significant latitude with regard to these items. Note the significant differences in government policy between France and Ireland as an example. Both are constrained in the same way but Ireland is booming and has a labour shortage, while France has a signficant unemployed underclass...
It took only a few years for Konrad Adenauer to kick the socialists out of the German economy after WW2. France still hasn't managed it.
On Ireland's boom, Ireland was actually forced by the EU to constrain their growth a few years ago. I know some Irish who are very upset about that.
Separatist,
Germany is almost as bad as France is today - the power of the unions to impose working hours and excessive benefits is only now starting to fall away due to competition from Poland and the Czech Republic.
Ireland's growth needed to slow - if the EU hadn't stepped in when it did, the invisible hand (of Adam Smith) would have with labour costs.
Post a Comment
<< Home