DiscussMormonism.com

PARIS -- Opponents of President Emmanuel Macron's proposed overhaul of France's pension system marched in Paris and other French cities Thursday on what is the 43rd day of strike action that has hobbled trains and public transport.
At the call of trade unions, train and metro workers, teachers and others took to the French capital's streets to demand that the government scrap its pension proposals.

Police were out in force but the march across southern Paris was calm, and the number of protesters was down compared to previous marches. The Interior Ministry put the number of marchers in the capital at 23,000 and 187,000 nationally — compared to a count by unions of 250,000.

Philippe Martinez, the leader of the far-left CGT union, said the det ermination "is just as big” as at the start of the strikes Dec.5
“It's never too late to make the government cede," he said.

The unions widely perceived to be most left-wing said they remained unsatisfied despite the government's decision last week to suspend a central piece of the proposed reform plan, that of raising the retirement age to qualify for a full pension from 62 to 64. They want the government to scrap other changes they fear would force them to work longer for less money.

Legislation incorporating other parts of the government's pension reform plan is to be presented at a Cabinet meeting next week. After that, there would be a three-month discussion with unions about financing the new pension system, including potential measures to raise taxes or the retirement age.

Macron says the new system, which aims at unifying 42 state-funded pension regimes, will be fairer and more sustainable.

“He (Macron) has always had disdain for us," said Eric Delaunay, a train driver. "43 days of strikes for railway workers, Metro workers and for some in the private sector and he is deaf to it.”

He said that he and his wife, also a railroad worker, prepared for the strike when money would be tight, packing the freezer and buying 25 kilos (55 pounds) of potatoes.

Macron called this week for “calm and clarity” and promised a better explanation of what the changes will mean for different French workers.

The weeks of strikes and protests have hobbled public transportation and disrupted schools, hospitals, courthouses and even opera houses.

While the number of striking workers has diminished, since Dec. 5,, the country's trains and Paris subways were still disrupted Thursday.

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wi ... s-68327075

I wonder if they have the same loophole in Europe as we do in the US. You can get your social security money and retire at 45 as long as you can find a doctor to sign your disability petition. Why such a protest, just get on disability like 1/12 do in the USA.

Even so, I wouldn't want to be a 60 year old Brit breaking my back at work so a Greek public service worker can retire at 52. In fact it'd be nice if we could leave the social security program altogether as Republican states here in the US.

In the UK it is first past the post voting. The Tories got 43% of the vote while the Labor party and the Liberal democrats got 43% of the vote. So 57% voted against the conservatives.

ajax18 wrote:Why such a protest, just get on disability like 1/12 do in the USA.

12.6% is 63/500. Where did you learn math?

aussieguy55 wrote:In the UK it is first past the post voting. The Tories got 43% of the vote while the Labor party and the Liberal democrats got 43% of the vote. So 57% voted against the conservatives.

I wonder why just taxing the rich hasn't seemed to work for France.

ajax18 wrote:I wouldn't want to be a 60 year old Brit breaking my back at work so a Greek public service worker can retire at 52.

No British person is in that situation. Many of us retire with at least two pensions, neither of which has been affected by the benefits given to people by the governments of other EU countries. One is a government pension, which depends on how long one has worked. Once you retire, this is subject to a 'triple lock', which ensures that it rises by "a minimum of either 2.5%, the rate of inflation or average earnings growth, whichever is largest". The second is a pension from your job, which is funded by investments resulting from contributions deducted from your salary, and also by contributions from your employer.

As a result of this, many retired persons in the UK are much better off than the working young, given that they also tend to own houses that have increased greatly in value over the years, have no childrearing expenses, and have paid off their mortgages. I don't personally think this is a very desirable situation, but that's the way it is.

Edited to add:

Retired people in the UK mostly voted to leave the European Union. Young people mostly did not. Similarly, people who had never been to college mostly voted to leave the European Union, while those with higher levels of education tended not to.

ajax18 wrote:

aussieguy55 wrote:In the UK it is first past the post voting. The Tories got 43% of the vote while the Labor party and the Liberal democrats got 43% of the vote. So 57% voted against the conservatives.

I wonder why just taxing the rich hasn't seemed to work for France.

Many French people would reply that taxing the rich does not work in France, because President Macron's government is remarkably reluctant so to do.

I was a public servant in a state government in Australia. The Government created a great pension scheme much of what was invested in Australia. Unfortunately the GFC hit these funds and I worked longer to recoup some (Thanks Wall street). A Mormon neighbour lost $400000. I worked until i was 72. It was in information management so not physically demanding. How would they expect construction workers to work jumping around scaffolding after 60. There are a lot of seniors who are income poor (low interest on investments) but asset rich. Some live in homes worth more than 500000. The Age care industry are drooling over this as it charges seniors for a place.

Many French people would reply that taxing the rich does not work in France, because President Macron's government is remarkably reluctant so to do.

Yeah, what's up with that? I thought Macron was a liberal? First he won't tax the rich enough, now he wants to make us work until we're 64. Is he secretly taking counsel from La Pen?

Many of us retire with at least two pensions

We have double and triple dippers here in the US as well.

As a result of this, many retired persons in the UK are much better off than the working young, given that they also tend to own houses that have increased greatly in value over the years, have no childrearing expenses, and have paid off their mortgages. I don't personally think this is a very desirable situation, but that's the way it is.

That's the way it is in the US as well. That's what happens when you choose socialism. Social security literally takes money from young working people who probably won't ever live long enough to collect it and gives it to older wealthy people who don't need it. The way lazy young people have been getting around this is finding a doctor to approve them as disabled. Then you can retire as early as you want without having to wait until you're 65. As long as you work jobs for pay under the table you're free to supplement your income in this way as well with little fear of fraud enforcement. Working for pay under the table also helps save on taxation and child support costs.

Edited to add:

Retired people in the UK mostly voted to leave the European Union.

Is that due to the demographic shift in your country? How did Boris Johnson win? Have older Brits changed their mind on politics the way older Americans from the rust belt did in 2016?

ajax18 wrote:How did Boris Johnson win? Have older Brits changed their mind on politics the way older Americans from the rust belt did in 2016?

Johnson won for a variety of reasons (as is always the case). But one of the easiest to explain was that the Labour Party membership, who ultimately choose the party leader from a slate of candidates who have gained adequate support from members of parliament, trades unions and some others, are considerably to the left of the average Labour voter. And the membership chose Jeremy Corbyn as their leader.

Corbyn was a man who had never held any ministerial office under a Labour government, or even a shadow office (in which the opposition chooses someone to 'shadow' a government minister and thus take main responsibility for developing a given policy area). Just imagine a young radical politician from the Vietnam War period, who had never ever modified his views about the wickedness of his own country and all its doings since that time, who expressed open admiration for Maduro, who tolerated left-wing antisemitism in his party to the extent that prominent British Jews who had been long-term Labour supporters announced that they just could not carry on, and add to that the fact that he was poor as a parliamentary debater, could not deal with critical interviewers, and was only comfortable speaking to roomfuls of dedicated supporters. Oh, and whose election manifesto was a whole series of often ill-targeted give-aways, so many that taken together they were simply not credible.

The result was that many Labour candidates reported voters saying to them on the doorstep, over and over again, "I've voted Labour all my life. I know that Johnson is a liar who often uses his mouth without engaging his brain, and is a rich kid from Eton who doesn't care about people like me. But I just can't bear to think of Corbyn being Prime Minister of this country. So this time I'm voting Conservative.'"

Even Johnson himself has told his party "Those votes were lent, not given". But that's how he got elected. He is a lot cleverer than Trump: whether (given his complete lack of any guiding principle but seeking his own advantage) that is a good thing for the UK remains to be seen.