French Jobless=12%; 0 Growth; We Warned Them!!
![]() |
French President Francois Hollande with President Barack Obama
Source: townhall.com
|
By Larry Elder, Jun. 28, 2012
Did the French just elect a
self-described socialist who wants to raise taxes on the rich? Yes, they did.
Is President Barack Obama asking for four more years with an economic
philosophy similar to that of the new French president? Yes, he is.
In France, those earning over a
million euros would face a tax rate of 75 percent. And one of Francois
Hollande's first acts as new president of France was to reverse his
predecessor's course and lower the retirement age from 62 to 60 -- this
in a country whose projected unfunded pension liabilities for its living citizens
are about $8.37 trillion, or 300 percent of its $2.774 trillion gross domestic
product. The United States' unfunded Social Security, Medicare and prescription
drug benefits liability for its living citizens is about $50 trillion, or 333
percent of our current $15 trillion GDP.
France is a county whose debt is 90
percent of its GDP (U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio is over 100 percent). It had zero
GDP growth in the first quarter of 2012 and has an unemployment rate of 10.2
percent. Taxes, as a percent of GDP, are 56 percent. (U.S. state, local and
federal tax take is 33 percent of GDP, excluding the dollar value of
government-issued mandates on the private sector).
France is a mess. Hollande, like
Obama, pays no attention to the many examples of government-controlled
economies versus those where government takes less from people and relies on
the private sector to create jobs.
Let's look at just one such
example. Hong Kong became a British colony following the first Opium War in the
mid-1800s. As mainland China fell to communist control a century later, many
Chinese migrants and corporations fled to the island. In 1961, Britain named
Sir John Cowperthwaite, a proponent of the Austrian school of free-market
economics, as financial secretary of Hong Kong. Residents of Hong Kong faced a
maximum 15 percent in personal taxes, no tariffs, no subsidies, no government
borrowing and minimal red tape. Cowperthwaite called it "positive
non-intervention."
Hong Kong, under his guidance, saw
a 50 percent rise in wages and a two-thirds fall in the number of households in
acute poverty. Exports rose by 14 percent a year, as Hong Kong evolved from a
trading post to a major regional hub and manufacturing base. Hong Kong is a
water-surrounded rock with no natural resources -- other than the industry of
its people.
In his first budget speech,
Cowperthwaite said: "In the long run, the aggregate of decisions of
individual businessmen, exercising individual judgment in a free economy, even
if often mistaken, is less likely to do harm than the centralized decisions of
a government, and certainly the harm is likely to be counteracted faster."
About Hong Kong, economist Milton
Friedman wrote: "At the end of World War II, Hong Kong was a dirt-poor
island with a per-capita income about one-quarter that of Britain's. By 1997,
when sovereignty was transferred to China, its per-capita income was roughly
equal to that of the departing colonial power. ... That was a striking
demonstration of the productivity of freedom, of what people can do when they are
left free to pursue their own interests."
In the U.S., we watch the spectacle
of Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, explaining to Congress why his
company lost $2 billion in private money. Meanwhile, the federal government
squanders many times more by "investing" public money in
now-bankrupt or soon-to-be bankrupt "green" companies.
After nearly four years of spending
with dismal results, Obama blames the results on an "inherited"
economy that was worse than he thought. He also blames the dastardly Republicans
for stopping him from spending the requisite amount of money to get things
right.
Bill Clinton, too, pushed for a
federal takeover of health care. In fact, everything ObamaCare purports to
achieve HillaryCare set out to do. But when Clinton saw negative polls on
HillaryCare and realized he overreached, he backed up.
Obama saw that parts of ObamaCare
polled well, like refusing to allow rejection based on pre-existing illness and
requiring insurance companies to cover the "children" of
policyholders. To keep the costs down, Obama called for an individual mandate,
believing that to "bend the cost curve" he must require young,
healthy types to get insurance or pay a fee for not doing so. Obama assumed
that once people took a closer look at ObamaCare, resistance would fade. It
hasn't. If anything, ObamaCare is more unpopular now than ever.
In France, not only did the voters
elect a socialist, they gave him enough seats in parliament so that his agenda
can get passed without compromise. For two years, Obama had that kind of power.
It gave us ObamaCare, "stimulus" and a tepid recovery.
Poor France.
Follow Larry Elder on Twitter
"LIke" Larry Elder on Facebook
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comment Policy:
The author of this blog will attempt to engage in conversation via the comments section whenever possible and recognize the 24/7 nature of the internet. Moderating and posting of comments will occur during regular operational hours Monday through Friday. Comments submitted after hours or on weekends will be read and posted as early as possible, however admins and/or the author is unable to commit to replying to every comment posted.
This is a moderated blog. That means all comments will be reviewed before posting. In addition, it is expected that participants will treat each other, as well as the author and admin, with respect. Comments that contain vulgar or abusive language; personal attacks of any kind will not be posted. Comments that are spam or that promote services or products will not be posted. It is requested that all comments remain on topic.
The Elder Statement blog does not guarantee or warrant that any information posted by individuals on this blog is correct, and disclaims any liability for any loss or damage resulting from reliance on any such information. The Elder Statement blog may not be able to verify, does not warrant or guarantee, and assumes no liability for anything posted on this website by any other person. The Elder Statement blog does not endorse, support or otherwise promote any private or commercial entity or the information, products or services contained on those Web sites that may be reached through links on our Web site.
To protect individual privacy and the privacy of others, please do not include phone numbers, addresses or email details in the body of a comment. Such information will result in removal of a comment.
Thank you for your attention.
The Elder Statement