is the founder of the research company and economic strategies, Lorello Ecodata. He also hosts the Cercle de l'Epargne. He is an expert on macroeconomic issues, issues related to savings and retirement. It follows particularly issues relating to public finances, employment and monetary policies. You can find his analysis on his site1.
After the cancellation of the article of the law on financing Security sociale2 relief on wage costs for low wages, the Government is seeking compensation. Moreover, after adopting an income tax reduction for the poorest taxpayers, it intends to make a new gesture for moyennes3 classes. This inflation measures is the mark of a government without scull cap that depending on the circumstances. After
weighed in 2012 and 2013, the tax bill, the President of the République4 now decided to reduce it. The 2014 target is both socially and economically; social because you have to mitigate the impact of tax increases and, in particular, the freezing of the scale that led to the tax liability on the income of several million French; economical because the Government, through the reduction of the tax burden, hopes to bring a recovery in economic activity shifts under our feet.
The Government was forced to extend further and further net assistantship with the consequent spiraling public expenditure and levies. This policy
sculling or stop and go not likely to reach any of the goals that are allocated. Indeed, the French crisis is primarily a crisis of supply and not a demand crisis. Consumption even if it has not grown at the same rate as before 2009, did not collapse. It is spread or increase marginally. However, industrial production declined. France5 insurmountable obstacle to rebalance its trade balance is in deficit for more than ten years. Exports are growing much more slowly than imports. Tertiary services are no longer able to compensate for the de-industrialization. The low rate of profit is a key brand of the supply crisis that undermines française6 economy. The fall in investment and the continued rise in bankruptcies also reflect the loss of competitiveness of French companies. Socially, this policy does not solve anything. The Government is obligated to expand further and further away from the net assistantship with the consequent spiraling public expenditure and levies. Rising unemployment, a symbol of the destruction of the economic base, weighs on final demand forcing the Government to support it by multiplying derogatory devices, devices that create harmful effects thresholds. There is a headlong rush to the authorities that turns into downward spiral.
Government policy is all the more inefficient it does not solve the deficit public7. The target of 3% of GDP is unattainable. Tax increases ruining economic competitiveness make her achievement more difficult. This year's deficit will be around 4% instead of 3.5% promised.
For thirty years, France practical economic Impressionism. Governments act in small steps. The measures taken are corrected once and remodifiées …
For thirty years, France practical economic Impressionism no fax cash advance. Governments act in small steps. The measures taken are corrected once and remodifiées … The Governments move to the economic margin sliders refusing to overhaul structures. Faced with the rise of corporatism, they defer to the great reforms tomorrow tomorrow or after tomorrow. The tax system, the payroll tax, distribution, labor law … are all sensitive subjects. Reports accumulate but their translation into action is still awaited. The failure of the 1995 major reform of Social Security Alain Juppé8 rest all memories. The French are unable to understand the directions chosen especially since governments rarely apply the platforms. For over thirty years, the cycle is always the same: a year of promise, one or two years of implementation chugging and two or three years of management over water with at the end, a lot of disillusionment and resentment. The Government
Manuel Valls, seeking his opinion lost his all attempts by multiplying the announcement effects. This severely wrong road. The Government
Manuel Valls9, seeking his opinion lost his all attempts by multiplying the announcement effects. This severely wrong road. It should follow the English or Spanish examples. The number one priority is to boost investment and promote the development of supply by increasing competition. Like Napoleon III, against the advice of key economic officials at the time, imposed in 1860, a treaty of free trade with the United Kingdom, the current government will grow up by imposing a shock of competition by way of orders. Instead of spending his time tighten and loosen the nuts tax, should be much better to change them. Extend the plates, reducing exemptions, lower marginal rates, as should be the objectives. However, with a greater than 93% of GDP debt, the massive reduction in levies is not for tomorrow. We must put an end to over 30 years of fiscal drift. Of course, to really restore the public accounts, the cost savings is essential. The Canada10, the Suède11 the Germany12 chose this winning track. But for France, that means less welfare and less public job. It is easy to write but terribly difficult to drive. Moreover, whether in the form of additional taxes or whether in the form of savings, the restoration of public accounts through lower growth or even a recession for one or two years. But do we have a choice? Today, France and Italy are mired in stagnation. Debt captures a significant portion of the savings of French and deprives the state of leeway for the future. In 2014, would we have the resources to launch the nuclear program, the TGV or the phone as in the 60s and 70s? France still has good infrastructure but for how long. In light of the debate to build the rail link between Roissy and Paris, it is striking that all has become difficult in France. A
an instrument, an objective; Tax has a function, covering the public. It is futile to try to make him play a multitude of roles. It is not intended to correct social inequalities, fight against pollution, foster home or the cinema. We must return to the concepts of stability and fiscal neutrality and stop the shell game whereby any tax increase or decrease hides vice versa.