Villepin the Iron man of France?

Sand

The recent turmoil in France cant have escaped anyones notice, as Villespein attempts to introduce flexiability into French labour law to combat youth unemployment rates of up to 50% in the French underclass (Largely Arab and African ethnic minorities thrown into abandoned suburbs and bribed to stay away) by allowing small employers to fire anyone under 26 without the usual restrictions over the first two years of a contract, encouraging firms to hire them in the first place. Quite simply the uprising last year signalled that the current system had failed and that dramatic action was required to ease the social unrest bubbling under the calm surface.

Obviously if youre middle class, white and have a college education in France youre not facing a 50% unemployment rate so this law is all bad for you. No surprise then that the usual suspects are out in the streets along with the unions, attempting to intimidate the French government into retreat and appeasement of the most vocal minority, over the majority - though they make a good pretence at acting like theyre actually out there for the common man, and the benefit to them is coincidental.

Unfortunately for them, it seems the underclass are fighting back for their interests as well - attacking the protestors, and engaging in some proactive redistribution of wealth while theyre at it. The cover of the Irish Times had a picture of one of the protestors getting the crap kicked out of them by 20-30 guys.

And above all this, we may actually have met a French leader whose ready to face down the French love of taking to the streets over every little thing (apparently this is the 24th "movement" in the past 4 years. Im not sure if the uprising last year is counted in this). Villepin seems to have remained steady and constant in his determination to push the legislation through, despite being assailed by opportunistic sniping from all sides (Sarkozy and the French defence minister (Michele Alliot-Marie if I recall correctly - apparently a leadership dark horse) whose prime concern seemed to be that "les Anglo-Saxons" were laughing at them over the whole mess, glad shes got her priorities sorted). Hes received little in the way of favours from what coverage Ive seen - I was struck by how Lara Marlowe in the Irish Times this week described his commitment to meet with the protestors once they ceased the protests as a climbdown, when it was the same offer he had extended since the beginning of the protests.

And yet he continues to stick to his guns, fair play to him. If he can underline that vocal minorities cannot derail the policies of the elected government through intimidation then perhaps he will prove to be a better option for French reforms than Sarkozy, whose opportunism is dissapointing. Hes talked a lot about reforms, but when a sensible one comes along he wastes little time in stabbing his rival in the back. Of course, Villepin *is* his rival but youd still hope for better.

The one weak link in the chain appears to be Chirac, whose laughable style of leadership is best demonstrated by his rush to his english class when confronted with the horror of a Frenchman addressing an international gathering in English. Chirac needs to sign the CPE into law, and the protestors are adjusting their aim to pressure him as theyre getting no joy from Villepin. Chirac may fold like a deck of cards, though given that to fold would leave Villepin to the wolves and ensure Sarkozys dominance he may be motivated through sheer hatred of Sarkozy to back Villepin to the hilt.

Anyway itll be interesting to see if Villepin lasts the course. I dont think he has any choice - hes been mauled from all sides so he cant retreat without abandoning all hope of the Presidency. He has to push on and make the CPE work, and earn respect if nothing else for implementing much needed reform in the face of bitter opposition from self interested mob rule.

Pazaz 21

It's about time someone stood up to the French !! I know the government is for the people, but it's for ALL the people not just the vocal minority who it will affect a little, over the majority who it will affect A LOT !!

Anyway, Villepin has to stay the course or else he will be obliterated (Politically, even though he may be obliterated physically if he does stay the course). I have a lot of respect for Villepin having the brass balls to continue, when everyone around him are losing their heads. It's the classic "well this policy isn't popular, so lets not do it, lets announce a tax break or something, people love tax breaks". I mean come on, nothing will get done if somebody dosen't make the hard decision and get what needs to be done, DONE !!

Forget Viva la France, VIVA LA VILLEPIN !!!!!!

fly_agaric

Sand wrote:

Unfortunately for them, it seems the underclass are fighting back for their interests as well - attacking the protestors, and engaging in some proactive redistribution of wealth while theyre at it. The cover of the Irish Times had a picture of one of the protestors getting the crap kicked out of them by 20-30 guys.

I hate to knock your idealism about 'the underclass' striking a blow for their interests (you almost sound like a old-style lefty there!) but I'd say that the gurriers assaulting and robbing see the protesters as rick pickings. A handy gathering of studenty marks with nice toys ripe for a mugging.

mike65

I'm boggled that its Villepin who's looking to reform the jobs market! I had him down as someone who was'nt going to rock the boat ahead of the elections.

As for the reaction to the laws, well quell surprisé.

Mike.

Sgt Sensible

If De Villepin was actually an elected representative (apparently he has never run for elected office) then I'd agree that the law should be implemented in some form or other but sneering at those French people (who've gone to college because they want to better themselves and who will after all become France's future taxpayers) for getting beaten up by mobs of cowardly thugs (who do not want to work) is an immature and frankly weird attitude to take.

However I still respect De Villepin for his speech at the UN opposing the war on Iraq.

Drexl Spivey

Sand and his favorite subject: France and the French

France is a socialist country: The French want paid holidays, security of employement, less time at work more time at home etc ...

So it is not surprising that the French are protesting a law that would make some jobs less secure.

The only reasoning behind your post is again to try to unravel "the truth" about the "nasty" French.

You'd wonder why immigrants who would be so broken down by the French system would actually stay in France if it was that bad of a segregation. (Immigrant are so much more welcome in IRL, why don't they move out here....).

Stop trying to make things complicated to suit your hate about the froggies:

The French love to protest. (ever heard of May 1968 smarty?)
The trouble makers love to make trouble (duh).

End of story.

mike65

I'm continually amazed the French economy does as well as it does and that French business is some of the most successful anywhere.

Mike.

Sgt Sensible

mike65 wrote:

I'm continually amazed the French economy does as well as it does and that French business is some of the most successful anywhere.

Mike.

I feel the same way about Ireland.

lili

Jeff Bond wrote:

Sand and his favorite subject: France and the French

France is a socialist country: The French want paid holidays, security of employement, less time at work more time at home etc ...

So it is not surprising that the French are protesting a law that would make some jobs less secure.

The only reasoning behind your post is again to try to unravel "the truth" about the "nasty" French.

You'd wonder why immigrants who would be so broken down by the French system would actually stay in France if it was that bad of a segregation. (Immigrant are so much more welcome in IRL, why don't they move out here....).

Stop trying to make things complicated to suit your hate about the froggies:

The French love to protest. (ever heard of May 1968 smarty?)
The trouble makers love to make trouble (duh).
End of story.

you summed up quite well the situation:)

what's new with this new employment contract?
a boss can fire an employee under 26 without have to give reason for it.
2 years are necessairy to judge if a person fits to the job.
doesn't it sound a bit abusive?

as for the opportunity for a defavorised young to get a job, let me laugh. why a boss would take a guy which has been in scolar failure if for the same price he can take a diplomed one?

frankly, if that is the goverment's plan to go out of the economic crisis, we are not ready to put the head out the water. i don't know what is the good way to go out, but what i'm sure is that the big french firms claimed in 2005 astronomic benefices and continue to speak about restructuration. who are the people which take avantage of those benefices? the actionnaires? who are they? american pensionnaires?
the french industry is dying because the globalisation which do nomore fit with the french social concept.
nomore investisments, rentability in short term to please financial system.
welcome in the liberalism theory, france.
wonder how long it will take to make us part of the third world.

Rockdolphin

Originally Posted by mike65
I'm continually amazed the French economy does as well as it does and that French business is some of the most successful anywhere.

Mike.

Sgt Sensible wrote:

I feel the same way about Ireland.

With you there Sgt Sensible. Our politicians are totally bemused and bewildered by the sucess of our economy. They scarcely have a policy on anything, scared silly they might do anything to frighten the Celtic Tiger away. Instead they fire slogans, gimmicks, consultants, tax forces and bans at every issue and busy themselves meddling in the everyday lifes of Irish citizens.

As regards the French, we might well learn a thing or two from them. The French don't allow their government to kick them around or get away with too much. I doubt they would put up with the charade that is the tribunals in this country for instance, nor the disgrace that is the trolley nation in our hospitals, not to mention things like the smoking ban or lunacy traffic laws. Meddlers they will not allow as masters.

I have to admit to not being an admirer in the past of the French. However they were a lone voice in Europe against the American led plans for the invasion of Iraq. They were not duped by American Intelligence and realised the only WMD around was weapons of mass deception. They faced down the ridicule and sneers aimed in their direction at the time of George's big Iraqi adventure and were not the most popular kid on the block. But let me tell you, French Cuisine is well and truly back on the menu and not least in New York !

mike65

However they were a lone voice in Europe against the American led plans for the invasion of Iraq. They were not duped by American Intelligence and realised the only WMD around was weapons of mass deception

Well the Germans might argue that point and they may have just got lucky on Iraqs WMD or lack of. Did the French punch holes in the US intelligence?

Mike.

Rockdolphin

mike65 wrote:

Well the Germans might argue that point and they may have just got lucky on Iraqs WMD or lack of. Did the French punch holes in the US intelligence?

Mike.

The Germans made some noise, but it was the Fench who spoke virgourously against the war. What US Intelligence ?, there was none, it was pure fabrication !

The Corinthian

Great, looks like another debate between the Old-Europeans versus the New-Puerto Ricans.

lili

chirac made his peech yesturday. he wasn't very clear.
seems his mission was to "saving private de villepin".

Pazaz 21

So Chirac is proposing a watered-down version of the CPE, big shock there !! He has shown his weakness and now they will go for the jugular !!

Gotta respect him for not folding totally, and the compromise is not that bad, reducing it to one year and knowing why you got fired are things that will not fundamentally affect the law. Anyway once the law is in effect they could always increase it back to two years if they wanted.

Don't think this will be accepted by the protesters though !!

Well i guess he has shown that he is willing to compromise and if the protesters are not willing to do the same and sit down and negotiate, then what can he do but pass the bill and blame it on a lack of willingness to talk or be reasonable by the unions! (Sarcasim Alert)

I love politics !!:D

The_Minister

Rockdolphin wrote:

I have to admit to not being an admirer in the past of the French. However they were a lone voice in Europe against the American led plans for the invasion of Iraq. They were not duped by American Intelligence and realised the only WMD around was weapons of mass deception. They faced down the ridicule and sneers aimed in their direction at the time of George's big Iraqi adventure and were not the most popular kid on the block. But let me tell you, French Cuisine is well and truly back on the menu and not least in New York !

Bollocks. The only reason they were against it was that they had lost lots of money that they had put into Iraq. It was financial interest nothing more.

Pazaz 21

Firespinner wrote:

Bollocks. The only reason they were against it was that they had lost lots of money that they had put into Iraq. It was financial interest nothing more.

Totally agree with you there.

Tariq Aziz, Saddam Hussein's deputy prime minister is quoted as saying that Russia and France had received millions of dollars of trade and service contracts with Iraq, "with the implied understanding that their political posture .... would be pro-Iraqi".

Plus i'm sure Germany were getting something out of it !!

Sand

Im dissapointed but unsurprised by Chirac. Hes made the error of attempting to compromise with unions/students who have repeatedly stated they are uninterested in compromise, only the CPEs complete removal. His compromise will only be viewed as a signal of weakness, like blood in the water. The protestors will only be encouraged to redouble their efforts.

The CPE badly needs to be implemented, not because its perfect (its not - the law shouldnt be limited by age, but I can understand Villepin is attempting to ease in reform and the best place to start is with youth unemployment as reform is most urgently required there) but to underline that the government sets policy, not unions or students. Its not like theyre hardcore Chirac/Villepin/Sarkozy voters to begin with, so the French right dont win any votes by appeasing them - in fact they probably lose votes.

The protestors need to be utterly crushed/sidelined/ignored, much as the miners were in Thatchers Britain, but in this case because governments shouldnt tolerate subversion of their mandate by vocal minorities. Its vitally important that the protestors cannot claim victory on any point, it should be utter defeat for them. Unfortunately Chirac has handed them a morale booster with his ill advised fence sitting.

You'd wonder why immigrants who would be so broken down by the French system would actually stay in France if it was that bad of a segregation. (Immigrant are so much more welcome in IRL, why don't they move out here....).

Id imagine its because the social system has successfully reduced them to utter dependancy on state handouts, which probably dont include plane tickets to other countries. When youre facing 50% unemployment and youre subtly encouraged by handouts to stay at home and watch Oprah its hard to summon the get up and go to change things. Hence the nihilistic and dystopian rioting of late last year.

Also EU law is that immigrants can only claim asylum in the first EU country they land in, so they cant go on tour shopping around for the best deal. And for second or third generation, theyre Frech citizens so cant claim asylum - well they could, but it wouldnt be approved.

Immigrants might rate Ireland above France, given that they can actually get a job here and getting a job is the first step to fufilling any immigrants dream of improving their lot and becoming a part of their new society (its no surprise that a country with chronic unemployment also has a ghettoised immigrant populations left outside society). But like I said, they need to land in Ireland first before any other EU country if theyre going to claim asylum. This is a tricky feat to accomplish given Irelands geographic location and the common immigrant route via the Med and Spain/Italy.

I hate to knock your idealism about 'the underclass' striking a blow for their interests (you almost sound like a old-style lefty there!) but I'd say that the gurriers assaulting and robbing see the protesters as rick pickings. A handy gathering of studenty marks with nice toys ripe for a mugging.

Well I did note some pro-active redistribution of wealth - if socialism isnt about siezing other peoples private property to improve your own lot in life then what is it about? Ah, seriously though I just threw it in there to highlight how people will instintively think that these protestors are out there fighting for all the people, when theyre only attempting to maintain their own status. Painting phone thieves and rioters as idealistic young trotsky fans makes as much sense.

And its hilarious seeing idealistic middle class communists talking about the plight of the lower classes meeting the lower classes in person to discuss what handouts do to a persons self esteem and place in society.

fly_agaric

Sand wrote:

And its hilarious seeing idealistic middle class communists talking about the plight of the lower classes meeting the lower classes in person to discuss what handouts do to a persons self esteem and place in society.

When you put it like that, it is a bit ironic. Or maybe sad is better.
Anyway, when I read incredible stuff like this I start think it will take more than job creation and anti-discrimination policies to sort out France's problems with its "underclass".

Thanks to Yalda’s charms, Halimi was imprisoned and tortured with acid and cigarette burns for more than three weeks in the heart of a council estate.

More than 30 neighbours in the building knew what was happening but said nothing about the crime

Hard for me to imagine an area so awful that the people there won't report someone being tortured to death in their building to the police because they are (a) so terrified of the local hoods or (b) just couldn't give much of a shít, really - or maybe (c) they hate the police/authorities and are very glad to see some "rich jew" getting what he deserves.

Well, maybe I exaggerate. Perhaps I can imagine areas like that - just not in the capital city of one of the richest and most developed countries in the world.

Sgt Sensible

Sand wrote:

The protestors need to be utterly crushed/sidelined/ignored, much as the miners were in Thatchers Britain, but in this case because governments shouldnt tolerate subversion of their mandate by vocal minorities. Its vitally important that the protestors cannot claim victory on any point, it should be utter defeat for them. Unfortunately Chirac has handed them a morale booster with his ill advised fence sitting.

Vocal minority? From all the polls and reports I've seen, between two thirds and three quarters of French people are opposed to the CPE, with roughly half of those wanting it modified. Show us where you get your information from. Do you believe that the law should be applied to all workers regardless of age? I have to ask in case that was another wee troll or something.

The only vocal minority is the unelected Monsieur De Villepin.

How should the CPE's opponents be crushed exactly?

lili

Sand wrote:

The protestors need to be utterly crushed/sidelined/ignored, much as the miners were in Thatchers Britain, but in this case because governments shouldnt tolerate subversion of their mandate by vocal minorities. Its vitally important that the protestors cannot claim victory on any point, it should be utter defeat for them. Unfortunately Chirac has handed them a morale booster with his ill advised fence sitting.



.

he can't seriously ignore 68% of french population. i don't know if you figure out the ampleur of the situation.
don't forget in which circonstance chirac have been elected in 2002. he haven't been elected on his program.
so, imagine what is the situation of de villepin which haven't even been choiced at all.
chirac had no choice than a compromise if he wanted saving the head of his prim minister meanwhile give the impress of hearing what the street is saying.

by the way, i think the bells of the death are ringing for this govnerment.

Sand

Vocal minority? From all the polls and reports I've seen, between two thirds and three quarters of French people are opposed to the CPE, with roughly half of those wanting it modified.

he can't seriously ignore 68% of french population.

Both the same point. 68% of French people do not oppose the CPE, 68% of a polled sample do, more than likely to a pre-loaded question anyway. France is a democracy, with policy set and passed by the representives of the people. It is not government by telephone poll, nor government by newspaper editorials, nor government by rent-a-mob.

The *only* mandate required is achieved at the voting booths. And last time out Chiracs government, god help us, won the election and the right to set policy. End of. If people do not like the policy set by this government, then vote them out in the next election. Attempts to subvert the exspressed electoral mandate are not acceptable tbh.

The only vocal minority is the unelected Monsieur De Villepin.

True, I dont respect the fact he has never stood for election, but he does lead the elected government of the French people. A bunch of students/union activists and telephone polls doesnt come even close to that sort of mandate. End of.

How should the CPE's opponents be crushed exactly?

Implement the CPE in full, ignore the protests and leave time/rioters to break their spirit. The protestors are counting on the track record of French government caving to union/student demands. If theyre stonewalled theyll eventually collapse. The government simply has to demonstrate that it will never, ever back down. Once this sinks in, the protestors will crawl back to whatever lecture hall they came from having learned a valuable lesson about mandates and where they come from.

i don't know if you figure out the ampleur of the situation.
don't forget in which circonstance chirac have been elected in 2002. he haven't been elected on his program.

No, he was ably assisted by the fact that nationalist socialists are more popular in France than plain vanilla socialists but thats hardly his problem. Had a socialist candidate profited from a similar voting breakdown they wouldnt be overly bothered by implementing center right policies would they?

Do you believe that the law should be applied to all workers regardless of age? I have to ask in case that was another wee troll or something.

I believe reform of the labour laws in France is required across all age groups, not just under 27 year olds - though it is most critical there. Im not overly concerned at the prospect of people being fired at 26 - outside of McDonalds, a quality employee with 2 years experience is worth more than saving a small bit on the wages for a unknown employee with no experience - but the law as it stands merely postphones the postphones the issue of overly restrictive labour laws.

The Corinthian

Sand wrote:

Both the same point. 68% of French people do not oppose the CPE, 68% of a polled sample do, more than likely to a pre-loaded question anyway.

Translation: “I don’t like this evidence, so I’m just going to dismiss it as fixed.”

France is a democracy, with policy set and passed by the representives of the people.

And if those people react badly to those policies, the representatives of the people have a habit of backing down in democracies. Remember the Poll Tax in the UK?

Rockdolphin

Firespinner wrote:

Bollocks. The only reason they were against it was that they had lost lots of money that they had put into Iraq. It was financial interest nothing more.

For that to be true the French would have to be finacial lunatics. Whatever trade they had with Iraq would be minuscule compared to trade with the USA and not nearly as important.

Rockdolphin

Pazaz 21 wrote:

Totally agree with you there.

Tariq Aziz, Saddam Hussein's deputy prime minister is quoted as saying that Russia and France had received millions of dollars of trade and service contracts with Iraq, "with the implied understanding that their political posture .... would be pro-Iraqi".

Plus i'm sure Germany were getting something out of it !!

If Tariq Aziz said it, it must be true ! Personally however I'd be extremely dubious of quoting scoundrels on the run to back up any argument.

As I saw it at the time France and Germany's stance was as much to do with European domestic affairs and an opportunity for a major powerplay. With the UK commited and other European countries other than Spain diddering and doddering as usual it was an opportunity to isolate Blair and front a alternative European middle eastern policy to the Americans. The Germans had been busy wooing the former communists states to their east and wished to extend their influence. They shamefully at the time threatened Poland and other former eastern bloc countries with reprisals if they looked further west than the Rhine and backed America.

Every nation will always look after it's own interests first. The Fench position has been vindicated regardless of motivations.

lili

Sand wrote:

Both the same point. 68% of French people do not oppose the CPE, 68% of a polled sample do, more than likely to a pre-loaded question anyway. France is a democracy, with policy set and passed by the representives of the people. It is not government by telephone poll, nor government by newspaper editorials, nor government by rent-a-mob.

The *only* mandate required is achieved at the voting booths. And last time out Chiracs government, god help us, won the election and the right to set policy. End of. If people do not like the policy set by this government, then vote them out in the next election. Attempts to subvert the exspressed electoral mandate are not acceptable tbh.



True, I dont respect the fact he has never stood for election, but he does lead the elected government of the French people. A bunch of students/union activists and telephone polls doesnt come even close to that sort of mandate. End of.



Implement the CPE in full, ignore the protests and leave time/rioters to break their spirit. The protestors are counting on the track record of French government caving to union/student demands. If theyre stonewalled theyll eventually collapse. The government simply has to demonstrate that it will never, ever back down. Once this sinks in, the protestors will crawl back to whatever lecture hall they came from having learned a valuable lesson about mandates and where they come from.



No, he was ably assisted by the fact that nationalist socialists are more popular in France than plain vanilla socialists but thats hardly his problem. Had a socialist candidate profited from a similar voting breakdown they wouldnt be overly bothered by implementing center right policies would they?



I believe reform of the labour laws in France is required across all age groups, not just under 27 year olds - though it is most critical there. Im not overly concerned at the prospect of people being fired at 26 - outside of McDonalds, a quality employee with 2 years experience is worth more than saving a small bit on the wages for a unknown employee with no experience - but the law as it stands merely postphones the postphones the issue of overly restrictive labour laws.

it's funny to see how the news from france are related outside france:)
first you have to explain what is "nationalist socialist", i know only one party in france which could be labelled of nationalist and it certainly isn't the socialist one.

as for the way chirac has been elected in 2002, i'm not sure you really got the stuff.
those elections have been based not on economy but on the security.
the votes for the lefties have been shared between several tendances. which make them weak.
the result was that in the second round, l'UMP and the extrem right were above the divided lefties.
so, what choice had the french then?
chirac won the election with 82% (that's what i call a dictator's score).

for this CPE.
the message of the french population is quite clear : we are in the 21th century, noway for us to come back to the 19th. if something might be done it will not be by screwing a part of the population regarding the age. or even by screwing the workers.
i don't know what you think about this but i find ashaming to see what has been the bilan of big french companies, the astronomic benefices they made in 2005 and we still hearing of restructuration!
it's not by screwing the workers that we will give a new start to the economy, the solution is elsewhere. our industries are dying by delocalisation, our big firms are sold to american and english holdings which don't give a damn on what will be the future. they only care on the short term and on what will be the profit to their actionnaires.

in france we do have already several sort of contracts. some of them are made for the bosses which want flexibility in work. we don't need a new contract.

ambro25

Rockdolphin wrote:

For that to be true the French would have to be finacial lunatics. Whatever trade they had with Iraq would be minuscule compared to trade with the USA and not nearly as important.

It depends on what they trade, however: France providing armaments and 'heavy industry' (steel mills, power plants) against petrol for decades. Don't forget that trade between countries has much more to it than mere balancing of zeroes - there's a political and strategical dimension to it as well, and you'd be surprised just how much FR was doing with Iraq in the 70s/80s, and how little US was doing with Iraq at the same time (I was in Iraq in the late 80s, building American pre-fab hospitals with erection sub-contracted to a FR company).

A most comprehensibe and insightful reference here. All in French, so get your Babel Fish ready

[cynical mode] The US just muscled in for the petrol - twice - they just had a better excuse the first time around[/cynical mode]

Back to the OP/anti-CPE posters: Villepin or not, measures like the CPE are long overdue to reestablish some form of 'distributive' + 'distributed' society (distributed as in: private industry vs civil service numbers).

FR industry still scores high gains for two main reasons: (i) exportation of labour-intensive processes to low-wages countries (much like everywhere else, no surprises there) and (ii) considering the labout laws prevalent for some time now, FR companies have had no choice but to become productivity champions to remain competitive.

Lilly dear - you can object to globalisation and wish it away, the fact remains that ignoring it will lead to ever-less job opportunities, because of reduced competitivity and eventual demise of FR companies. Better to still have a company with management + ancillary services in FR and manufacturing elsewhere, than no company at all... Because choosing to ignore it in FR does not mean that your foreign competition will abstain from using it.

lili

ambro dear,
i know that the situation is irreversible. that we have to deal with globalisation and liberalism. that the profit is what makes turning the world.
ok, we will die of it.

ambro25

lili wrote:

ambro dear,
i know that the situation is irreversible. that we have to deal with globalisation and liberalism. that the profit is what makes turning the world.
ok, we will die of it.

Look, it's time for FR people to step out of Utopia for a moment and realise that all of the social benefits that they have built over the years come at a price: it's been easy enough to pay it right up to the mid-80s, when the FR balance of trade was fairly positive because of all the mirages, TGVs and nuclear plants the GVT sold to the likes of Iran, Iraq, China, Brazil, etc.

But with an ever-shrinking active population since, and within that an ever-shrinking workforce in the private sector to generate added value (which the GVT taxes, which taxes pay for the benefits and the ever-growing army of civil servants), 'tant va la cruche à l'eau qu'à la fin elle se casse'.

It's the centuries-old, basic principle of the communicating vases: you take some one side, the other side drops; you add some one side, the other side rises So whichever way you look at it, and without posing as the baby-eating ultra-capitalist here, there's two avenues: (i) stick with the "30 Glorieuses" approach to social benefits and strike for a 'yes' or a 'no' to preserve it no matter what (as has been the case to date), until eventual bankrupcy, or (ii) start making allowances for the fact that the rest of the world will not stop evolving just because FR people have decided that they want their cake and eating it.

The third alternative, mediation, has been tried since the early 90s and, to date, I've yet to be convinced that it's done any good, in fact if it's done anything at all. Forgive me if I'm stating the situation in somewhat brutal terms here, but unemployment has not dipped below 10% for the last 15 years (I've served my National Service at the Cabinet of a Préfet de Région - I could tell some things about these statistics as well ), personal taxation has not reduced in real monetary terms (it can't, there's less and less people paying tax :rolleyes:), yet the GVt keeps caving in, for instance imposing on private companies to produce the same (if not more, year-on-year) amount of added value with 4 hours less per employee per week. You do the math: In a company employing 10 people, that's the same as having one employee less for the same amount of work :eek:

As I always tell people who ask me about France and all that's happening now (which has been happening for years, let's be honest), there's a reason why I left with slamming the door in '94 and not looked back since. Fact of the matter is, you're simply not allowed to be successful in France and *God forbid* if despite the Himalyas of red tape you somehow did manage to make it good, you're then not allowed to reap the rewards anyhow...

lili

ambro25 wrote:

for instance imposing on private companies to produce the same (if not more, year-on-year) amount of added value with 4 hours less per employee per week. You do the math: In a company employing 10 people, that's the same as having one employee less for the same amount of work :eek:

...

do you know that france is the country which is the most productive regarding the work per hour?
means that with our 35h we are still the most performing.

ambro25

Of course I do - that's my main point :eek: FR has no choice but to be one of the, if not the, most productive country per workforce capita, when you consider all that each such capita has to "contribute to the pot" to keep the social momentum going.

FR industry has no choice to continue to exist - it's simple maths:

I pay you €10 an hour for 35 hours a week, €350 of your time and my money gives me 100 widgets (€=3.5 cost per unit, lets keep it simple) which I can sell at €5. So, I can pay you your €3.5 and I keep €1.5 profit.

My German (or US or UK, or...) competitor pays his employees €10 an hour (it's the West, let's still keep it simple and say salaries are more-or-less in-line) for 40 hours, €400 of his employee's time and his money gives him 100 widgets (€=4.0 cost per unit) which he can also sell at €5 (it's a market economy ). So, he can pay his employee their €3.5 and keep €0.5 profit (less, because his employee is not as productive as you, my trusted and overproductive FR employee , even though he works more hours).

Now, my UK competitor, he ain't no fool. He decentralises production to India, and pays his employees €1 a day, 10 hour day, 6 day week (total cost = €60 per week, €0.10 per hour). If his employee can make even a quarter (25) of the example 100 widgets in a 60 hours week, grossly underproductive by my example FR standards, my UK competitor is still laughing because his cost per unit is €2.4 - and he can still sell his widgets €5.

Now, as we all know, Indians (no prejudice intended - I've worked with Indians for years in heavy industry and they're world-class) are no slouches where business and processes are concerned. So while FR are busy griping about 'Les Anglo-Saxons', they should realise that it's not so much US pension funds that are stripping the land's jobs away anymore, but increasingly countries that -in the FR psyche- are still very incorrectly assimilated to be '3rd World'. Have a quick Google gander for 'Mittal Steel'

lili

punaise!
tu peux me répéter ça en français?
l'économie me prend la tête, alors imagine ce que cela peut donner en anglais:D
non, je plaisante:)
alors, quelle est la solution d'après toi? on se lance dans le libéralisme, nous nous contentons d'un bol de riz, nous évitons d'avoir des ennuis de santé, nous glisserons la pièce à tous les mendiants qui paveront les rues et nous nous endormirons le coeur léger après avoir suivi les quotations en bourse des grandes entreprises françaises sur tf1?
des fois je me demande à quoi nous sert de trimbaler un cerveau d'1 kg. les fourmis n'en ont cure.

répond moi en français stp. et je suis sérieuse cette fois ci;)

Sand

Translation: “I don’t like this evidence, so I’m just going to dismiss it as fixed.”

Translation: "I think election results are u****ortant. Clearly telephone polls are the best way to set policy."

And if those people react badly to those policies, the representatives of the people have a habit of backing down in democracies. Remember the Poll Tax in the UK?

That surrenders democracy to those who shout loudest on any particular issue. Who do you think sets US policy on Cuba? Is it the vast majority of Americans who couldnt care less about Cuba (possibly not even aware where it is), or vocal minority lobby groups organised and funded by violently anti-Castro Cuban-Americans? Would you be willing to entertain the possibility that the reason people feel their vote doesnt matter anymore might have something to do with politicians yielding to vocal lobby groups?

as for the way chirac has been elected in 2002, i'm not sure you really got the stuff.

Oh I got it - the nationalist socialist candidate got more votes than any of the regular socialists. The nationalist socialist vote is going to be split next time around between Le Pen and some other tool whose name I cant quite recall at this point, and the center right vote is going to be split between Sarkozy and Villepin so assuming the vanilla socialists can put a strong candidate forward theres a good chance theyll profit from almost the same circumstances that screwed them last time around. Would you then demand that the vanilla socialists implement center right policies instead of socialist ones? Not likely.

for this CPE.
the message of the french population is quite clear : we are in the 21th century, noway for us to come back to the 19th. if something might be done it will not be by screwing a part of the population regarding the age. or even by screwing the workers.

Nobodys asked the French population - theyve asked a sample group of French people some question (I havent seen the poll but given the uniformly negative editorials I would sincerly doubt the poll wasnt loaded). Ive got another sample group of young French people here .... the most telling phrase is

"I prefer to live in a world where you can get fired within two weeks but find work quickly, than in a world where you have a job for life but it takes five years to find another if you lose it."

And who can blame him? Is your economic security greater in a system where you can move easily from one job to the next or in a system where your job is extremely difficult to get, and as hard to replace?

i don't know what you think about this but i find ashaming to see what has been the bilan of big french companies, the astronomic benefices they made in 2005 and we still hearing of restructuration!

Companies exist to be profitable - its what they do. If they werent profitable theyd be out of business and no one would be employed. Every employee has to increase the companies profit, directly or indirectly.

The real problem for the French economy is that its unemployment rate is terrible and has been for decades, so despite the profits of French companies, many French cant get a job. Ireland had such rates and we were an economic basketcase run by muppets on the periphery of Europe with no infrastructure, with our best and brightest fleeing to stronger more open economies in the UK and US. There were still successful Irish companies, but this wasnt of great benefit to Ireland as a whole.

It eventually got so bad that Ireland was faced with either complete economic collapse or fixing the problems, painful as it may be. France is not in as bad a position as Ireland was, but no economic system can sustain endemic unemployment indefinitly - even before the social problems of apathy and segregation between the employed elite and the unempleyed underclass are considered. I dont know why the French are so confident they cannot succeed in a more competitive system, or why they look to the future with such fear. If there are problems, identify them, fix them. The biggest and most pressing problem is that people find it hard to get a job in France, due largely to inflexiable contracts. The CPE isnt perfect, but it is a step in the right direction.

The current system was built in another era, on the assumptions of another era. If you wish to ensure the survival of the current model, then you and every French couple out there need to throw out the birth control and start pumping out kids to support you in later life, much as they do in the third world.

in france we do have already several sort of contracts. some of them are made for the bosses which want flexibility in work. we don't need a new contract.

So Ive noticed, the protestors are now widening their demands to reverse earlier reforms as well. Chiracs effort at compromise with them has predictably only encouraged them to continue protests, and to demand ever more. What an idiot he is.

The Corinthian

Sand wrote:

Translation: "I think election results are u****ortant. Clearly telephone polls are the best way to set policy."

That’s not the point I made. I accused you of dismissing evidence when it didn’t suit you, which is a different issue. But feel free to continue cherry picking what will back you up.

That surrenders democracy to those who shout loudest on any particular issue. Who do you think sets US policy on Cuba? Is it the vast majority of Americans who couldnt care less about Cuba (possibly not even aware where it is), or vocal minority lobby groups organised and funded by violently anti-Castro Cuban-Americans? Would you be willing to entertain the possibility that the reason people feel their vote doesnt matter anymore might have something to do with politicians yielding to vocal lobby groups?

That’s part of democracy Sand. Like it or lump it.

ambro25

lili wrote:

alors, quelle est la solution d'après toi?

On efface tout et on recommence

Je charie (à peine), mais le Code du Travail, Code des Impôts, Prudhommes, Cumulation des Avantages Acquis 'corporatiste' (par exemple, la prime de Charbon aux Employés SNCF, encore en vigueur sous forme pécunière, qui a été acquise dans les années 30 eut égard aux conditions de travail des cheminots à cette époque), etc. - Il y maintenant tant de personnes qui 'tirent la couverture à eux' sous une forme ou une autre, que n'importe quelle réforme est d'office, forcément, condamnée à l'immobilisme.

Dans ce contexte, à moins de sabrer tout pour tout le monde (ce que je trouverai très socialiste, après tout ) et recommencer sur des bases saines, je ne vois vraiment pas de solution à long terme.

lili wrote:

on se lance dans le libéralisme

Succintement: oui.

lili wrote:

nous nous contentons d'un bol de riz,

Tu exagères. Beaucoup. Elle vient d'un Slogan CGT celle-là? :rolleyes:

lili wrote:

nous évitons d'avoir des ennuis de santé,

Tu exagères. Quoique... effectivement, moins de Sécu mènerait peut-être à moins d'hypocondriaques donc moins de Trou de Sécu, etc.

Il me semble, également, que les complémentaires Santé deviennent la norme ces temps-ci?!?

lili wrote:

nous glisserons la pièce à tous les mendiants qui paveront les rues

Les Français ne font déjà plus la charité de nos jours?

Il me semble qu'il y a déjà nombre de mendiants dans les rues en France, et que multiplier les opportunités d'emplois plutôt que de les maintenir artificiellement fermées, aussi précaires que soient ces emplois, ne peut qu'améliorer la situation. Plus d'aide aux mendiants (et autres) contre moins ou pas plus d'emplois porteurs d'impôts sur le revenu = de moins en moins de richesse à distribuer. C'est pourtant simple!

lili wrote:

et nous nous endormirons le coeur léger après avoir suivi les quotations en bourse des grandes entreprises françaises sur tf1?

Non. Vous vous endormirez le coeur léger en sachant que même si votre emploi touche à sa fin pour une raison X, il existe toujours un autre emploi à saisir à court terme pour payer les traites, le prêt immobilier et metter à manger sur la table. J'en ai personnellement fait l'expérience à maintes reprises. Il faut se donner les moyens de réussir, et abandonner cette mentalité d'assistance à tout bout de champ: l'assistance devrait se cantonner à aider à relever la tête après un coup dur, assurer une période de transition professionelle/personnelle sans trop d'encombres, mais jamais devenir un mode de vie. :mad:

lili

i made a super long answer to you ambro with an example. and something went wrong, didn't works!

well, in short, i gave a definition of liberalism. because you talk to me of privileges for the cheminots but frankly, what is it comparing to those who pratice "abus de biens sociaux" at high scale?

well, my definition is this one :

liberalism is the right given to the financialists to freely exploiting the poors.

ambro25

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree, by the look of things

You can consider the "abus de biens sociaux" ("abuse of company goods/priviledges/assets", for the non-FR speaking here ) of which you speak under two angles:

(i) on the large-ish scale to which you refer (i.e. involving multinationals, e.g. Thomson-CSF, Matra, etc.), governement is always involved and benefits, to a degree. Either 'officially' (some Ministry gets €s, rebates, whatever) or 'unofficially' (some Minister gets €s, exotic holidays, whatever) - not that such practice is ever 'official', of course, but surely you get my gist.

(ii) on the 'everyday' scale, everyone in a company or another is at it: from the secretary who might help herself to a couple of pages of A4 paper for her home printer, to the manager who uses his company mobile phone for social calls, to the MD who puts a bar tab on his expenses.

At the end of the day, such "abus de biens sociaux" do not directly affect the notional 'everyday worker'. The most effect it would have, is to decrease the company's profitability and therefore eventually reduce taxation on same and therefore eventually reduce the redistribution on a national scale of tax income. That's irrelevant, since those people helping themselves (at any level) already get the additional benefit of the abuse, so are not losing out in this missed-out redistribution (their fault, my point is don't blame the boss only - look thy neighbor's eye and all that ). The worst effect it could have, is to actually undermine the company's finances so much that it goes to the wall. But you'd have to be digging in the pot pretty seriously to get to that stage.

But the "Avantages corporatistes" ("corporation advatages", advantages acquired by an entire type of profession, e.g. rail workers) to which I was referring are esconsed in either Law, Decrees or Work Conventions, and so are not 'criminal' (unlike the "Abus the biens sociaux", they're considered perfectly normal and not subject to legal scrutinity and due process of law if and when). But the net effect is no different, particularly when such 'advantages' stop being justified: reverting back to my 'rail workers' examples earlier, since when did rail workers stop shoveling coal into a locomotive? Yeah, about 20 years ago at least! So why are they still entittled to that 'coal allowance'? :mad: Because they or their Unions fought for it and got it when it mattered, which is fair enough, but God forbid they actually consider doing the decent thing and let it go when the actual reason behind it disappears altogether! As I said therefore - too many people pulling the cover to themselves. :mad:

lili

attends, tu ne vas pas comparer les 10 euros qu'un cheminot touche chaque mois à ta voiture de fonction ou ton appartement de fonction ou pire même, la résidence secondaire de ton patron!
tu as eu connaissance des bénéfices nets de la sncf cette année?
non?
fais le. le porte parole chargé d'annoncer la nouvelle était presque honteux de le faire. et je ne te parle même pas du résultat des compagnies pétrolières.

tiens, je vais juste d'entendre un truc rigolo à la radio. "les jeunes devront manifester jusqu'à leur retraite qu'ils n'auront jamais":D

ambro25

lili wrote:

attends, tu ne vas pas comparer les 10 euros qu'un cheminot touche chaque mois à ta voiture de fonction ou ton appartement de fonction ou pire même, la résidence secondaire de ton patron!

It's not me who made such a comparison first, it's you! :eek:

As for "voitures de fonction" (company cars) or "appart' de fonction" (company flat), you don't have to be a patron/boss to have one. The lowliest drinks or mobile phones representative gets a company 206 to go around the wholesalers/clients - what's your point? That he/she should go by foot? Or are there 'tiers', whereby such a lowly employee is entitled to a company car but a manager is not? :eek:

I've never heard of "company flats" outside of the Civil Service in France - you should see some of the beauties the Administration owns and leases well below the market price for various "civil servie dignitaries" in every single town in France.

A prime-positioned flat in Metz (2 min. walk to absolute center), in a recently-built (late-80s) "Résidence de Grand Standing" right on the river bank, current value about €350-€400k, that would rent for €1300-€1600 per month, currently rented to the DRAS (Direction Régionale des Affaires Sociales) Director for less than €500. Oh, wait, there's also the DRET (Direction Régionale de l'Equipement et des Travaux) Director in the same building, paying between €600 to €700 for a 3-bedroom duplex. How do I know? My parents live in there, have done so for 10 years. They pay €1500, since they're not civil servants. Then get to pay their income tax to pay for these two guys to get luxury digs for cheap-as-chips :mad:

And I'll skip on the Préfets and various High-Level departmental/regional heads of Cabinets, with f*cking chauffeurs, cooks and domestics!!! All of it at the tax-payers' expense: some redistribution! So, what do you propose? They're not "patrons", they're Civil Servants FFS!

As for the "residence secondaire", I doubt very much the company pays for it. More like, the patron/boss pays for it out of his earnings - which is fair enough in my book: the bucks stops with him/her, so he/she gets paid most, and he/she spends his/her pay how they bloody well want to :mad:

For non-FR readers of the thread, I hope you're now getting a useful insight into FR psyche, when I stated earlier that you're simply not allowed to be successful in FR: if you're successful, God forbid, the usual consensus by FR onlookers is that you "must be abusing the system on way or the other", you're "scamming taxes", etc... In a few words: you're the bad guy, you owe everything to everyone else :mad:

lili wrote:

tu as eu connaissance des bénéfices nets de la sncf cette année?
non? fais le. le porte parole chargé d'annoncer la nouvelle était presque honteux de le faire. et je ne te parle même pas du résultat des compagnies pétrolières.

Don't focus so much on the one example I used to illustrate my point: there are litterally thousands of such "Avantages Corporatifs", in very many walks of professionnal life. The problem is not so much that they exist, but the cumulative, paralysis-inducing effect which they have as people who benefit from them are reluctant to let go of anything at all (even when equitable to do so for everyone, not just the 'bosses') and just want more.

lili wrote:

tiens, je vais juste d'entendre un truc rigolo à la radio. "les jeunes devront manifester jusqu'à leur retraite qu'ils n'auront jamais":D

Aujourd'hui, c'est drôle. Dans 20 ans... Tu les auras, tes mendiants innombrables.

lili

ambro25 wrote:

I

Aujourd'hui, c'est drôle. Dans 20 ans... Tu les auras, tes mendiants innombrables.

et tu crois que la bande de charlots qui sevie au gouvernement va nous épargner ça?
laisse moi rire. nous avons certainement la droite la plus pitoyable au monde!

ambro25

Peut-être, probablement pas... mais au moins ils essaient - which is the whole point of the CPE (and the thread).

If everytime the GVT tries something, mass strikes ensue and they back off, yet more mediation has to take place, then every such time the scope available for the kind of reforms needed to get the country out of the mire reduces further... until there just can't be any more reforms, which is just about where France is now.

Tell me something: imagine for a moment, that the CPE was introduced by a truly-popular politician (very-very-very-hypothetical, I know, but...). Now, would there be just as much discontent? Less? I don't think it would make one iota of difference. So shifting the blame on politicians is pointless - as I've posted before in this thread, everybody in France has to accept their share of responsibility in the current situation: if everyone realised for a moment that they can't have all the advantages to themselves without taking some from somewhere/someone else and were willing to speculate a little of their "qualité de vie" now to accumulate some more later, then you'd have a beginning of a solution. Like Hell that's gonna happen... :mad:

Pazaz 21

Very interesting insight into the french state of mind and the way they run things. The thing i'm amazed at is the fact that the government is powerless and that the people are ok with that. Who is going to take the french government, and therefore the french people, seriously if they cannot even conduct there own internal affairs without causing a riot every time. The implications in the UN Security Council, their power within the EU, has been totally undermined.:eek:

Surely in this day and age a civil disscussion can be held and a compromise reached. No matter how much i might protest, i am no more likely to stop the sun coming up in the morning then the protesters are to stopping globalization.

I'm sure Marie Antoinette liked the way it was too, but things didn't quite work out for her either.

I agree that if this cycle of the gvt trying to introduce necessary reform and the people taking to the streets because it dents their rosey hopes of a cushy civil service job, reform will become harder and harder to introduce, as the unions, and people of france, realise that they can stand up to the gvt and get away with it.

I mean what is the point of having a government or voting for someone, if you are not going to trust them to do the best thing for the country ? ( I am aware that Villepin was not voted into office but Chirac was and he is behing the CPE, well sort of !)

lili

Pazaz 21 wrote:

I mean what is the point of having a government or voting for someone, if you are not going to trust them to do the best thing for the country ? ( I am aware that Villepin was not voted into office but Chirac was and he is behing the CPE, well sort of !)

that is the prob. chirac haven't been elected on his economical program. the 2002 compaign was about security.

you know, i'm old enough for have seen several governments. and i must say that my life was better under socialism. look at the period 97-01. french economy was more than correct. since the right party is in power, it's the total mess. and it's not with this CPE that the things will change. what makes turning economy and entreprises is not the work contracts but how big is the "carnets de commandes". i must say that the "carnets de commandes" are poor since the right is in power. i don't even know who is our economy minister, that's say all!
they is nomore work! i put the fault on those foreigner financial groups which buy our entreprises and are more interested to make "plu-value" than to make turn the french economy.

Pazaz 21

lili wrote:

that is the prob. chirac haven't been elected on his economical program. the 2002 compaign was about security.

Those who sacrifice the economy for security, deserve neither !!:eek:

(I know i have taken poetic licence with the quote, but i think i works just as well this way)

lili

ambro25 wrote:

Peut-être, probablement pas... mais au moins ils essaient - which is the whole point of the CPE (and the thread).

:

mais tu n'as pas encore compris? t'es complètement déconnecté de la réalité. personne en veut de ce CPE. pourquoi? parce qu'il ne va pas solutionner le problème de l'emploi des jeunes. les jeunes qui sont en difficulté sont ceux qui sont défavorisés. défavorisés par discrimisation ou simplement parce qu'ils ont été en échec scolaire.
tu crois vraiment qu'un patron si il a le choix va prendre un de ces jeunes? mais voyons, soyons sérieux, il va prendre celui qui lui posera le moins de problème. nothing new under the sun. ils appellent ça "l'égalité des chances" tu parles!
alors tu vas me dire que le fait de pouvoir le balancer sans autre forme de procès l'incitera a être moins frileux. mais mon pauvre, on est dans une mouise pire que ça. il n'y a pas de travail! alors CPE ou pas...

tu sais ce qui pourrait éventuellement motiver un patron à embaucher? diviser les charges sociales et aussi le smic du temps qu'on y est:D
peut être que dans l'industrie les entreprises rapatriraient le matériel de production.
voilà, j'ai parlé comme une vraie libérale:D

lili

Pazaz 21 wrote:

Those who sacrifice the economy for security, deserve neither !!:eek:

(I know i have taken poetic licence with the quote, but i think i works just as well this way)

and i told the truth:)

Cillian1973

Which of these two options is better Unemployment or employment which may not be as secure as young french people would like? Clearly these protesters are foolish what is so horrible about this law when it could reduce the current soaring unemployment among the youth????

lili

Cillian1973 wrote:

Which of these two options is better Unemployment or employment which may not be as secure as young french people would like? Clearly these protesters are foolish what is so horrible about this law when it could reduce the current soaring unemployment among the youth????

it's what the actual government try to make believe. but it will change nothing. i see only more precarity with this law. what is strange is that even the MEDEF (association of the bosses) didn't ask for it.

The Corinthian

Cillian1973 wrote:

Which of these two options is better Unemployment or employment which may not be as secure as young french people would like? Clearly these protesters are foolish what is so horrible about this law when it could reduce the current soaring unemployment among the youth????

That is a simplistic viewpoint. Full employment is not necessarily a good thing - after all do you really want this kind of full employment?

I can understand where de Villepin is coming from, as the job of reforming the French economy is a rather daunting task and necessary to say the least. Unfortunately there are social issues with the law he is attempting to introduce, most notable of which is that it is discriminatory.

France, as with many of the economies in Europe, is in need of serious market reform. However, blindly following the Anglo-Saxon model is not necessarily the solution. After all, even the Anglo-Saxon model cannot ultimately compete with the cheap labour that the third World can provide.

lili

what is incredible with this government is that they made a law in 2004 which says that the "code du travail" (rights working code) can't be touched without a concertation with the syndicats first.
they didn't even respect their own laws:rolleyes:

ambro25

@ Corinthian - whilst I agree with your caveat, you cannot however denigrate the attempt that is (at least) being made. The viewpoint which you slammed as simplistic may be so, but the underlying point is prescient all the same: at the stage at which the FR socio-economic cul-de-sac is, I doubt very much that you may devise a suitable exit/repair strategy, taking account of all possible stakeholders, which won't break any eggs so to speak. With regard to the 26-year age thing, considering the current employment situation in FR, I suppose for anyone in that age bracket it's still relatively easy to land elsewhere. Past that (at any rate, past 35-ish), your chances are literally nil. So I see that as a safeguard measure rather than 'inverse' ageism.

For sure, the CPE should ideally be all-embracing (i.e. not restricted to sub-26 years old)

@ Lilli - you really should make your mind, as to whether you blame the government or the unions (union = Syndicat). The policies of the previous socialist governments, or rather their lack thereof where employment is concerned, have landed FR where it is. Blaming the "firefighters" (not faultless themselves, of course, but still) because they can't put the fire out since they were called to the disaster too late just won't do as an excuse. The time for looking for excuses is now long, long gone: for any current or near-future FR government, it's time to sh1t or get off the pot. In that respect, Villepin is doing good in my book.