A glimpse at America under Dem. leadership

[Boz/BoFan 0]

Here is just a taste of what you can expect the America of tomorrow to look like if Dems left unchecked implement their ultimate goal. This is irrefutable.....

 

 

France's Problem is a Statist-Run Socialist Economy

By Lawrence Kudlow

 

Why is it that so many French people would rather riot than work?

 

For nearly a fortnight, French students repeatedly have taken to the streets in protest of a modest labor reform proposed by Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin. It seems that Villepin had the audacity to suggest that companies hiring workers under the age of 26 have the ability to fire those workers in the first two years of employment. Villepin's far-from-Draconian reform is a reaction to the country's government-planned entitlement state, overregulated labor laws, and sky-high jobless rate.

 

But French students apparently prefer their little worker's paradise just the way it is. The overall jobless rate in France hovers around 10 percent, so-called "youth unemployment" is 23 percent, and in some of the Muslim-heavy suburbs, joblessness is nearly 50 percent. Some paradise.

 

In France, you see, companies don't grow because it's too costly to hire while it's against the law to fire. Hence, since they rarely add jobs, French businesses under-perform, under-produce, and under-employ. Think of it: It's awfully tough to increase output without a growing workforce to produce it.

 

The Villepin reform, of course, would make it a lot easier for firms to hire since they would no longer have to lock-in high wages and benefit costs without first confirming worker productivity, at least for two years. But in response to this mild capitalist reform, a reported 500,000 students have emerged in angry protest. There's now even a threat of a general strike, with government unions, trade unions, and student unions possibly teaming together to shut down the entire French economy (or what's left of it).

 

Of course, it wasn't all that long ago that young Muslims rioted and vandalized urban centers across France. Their beef was cultural in nature, but it was also rooted in the fact that France is anti-opportunity, anti-wealth, anti-jobs, anti-markets, anti-work, and anti-capitalism.

 

Indeed, at the heart of the French problem is a statist-run socialist economy that is massively overtaxed and overregulated. France's public government sector, for instance, accounts for more than 50 percent of GDP. In other words, private business in France is in the minority.

 

Added to this, France's top personal tax rate is 48 percent, with a VAT tax of nearly 20 percent. So that means French laborers face a combined 68 percent tax rate on consumption and investment. No wonder France has created less than 3 million jobs over the past twenty years, compared to 31 million in the United States. Economic growth in "cowboy capitalist" America has exceeded that of France's worker paradise by nearly 50 percent.

 

In a dramatic speech to the European Parliament last summer, British Prime Minister Tony Blair hit the mark when he criticized all Western European economies for their inability to compete on an acceptable global level. Asked Blair, "What type of social model is it that has 20 million unemployed in Europe? Productivity rates falling behind those of the USA? That, on any relative index of a modern economy -- skills, R&D, patents, information technology -- is going down, not up?"

 

Financial Times international editor Olaf Gersemann blames French and European unemployment on high minimum-wage requirements and overly strict employment-protection laws. Gersemann, who scathingly criticized Western Europe in his book "Cowboy Capitalism," says these labor-market regulations have created millions of involuntary unemployed throughout Europe, affecting immigrants in particular. He writes, "Most French, German, and Italian voters simply refuse to accept the necessity of a Thatcher-Reagan style economic revolution." He notes that per capita income in the U.S. now exceeds that of France by close to 40 percent, with Germany and Italy lagging even further behind.

 

All of this is reminiscent of the British disease of the 1960s and '70s. Back then, striking labor unions closed down the English economy again and again, and it took until the early 1980s for Margaret Thatcher to put an end to it. At one point, the Iron Lady actually called in tanks and troops to stop the print unions from shutting down Fleet Street. (This is what turned media-magnate Rupert Murdoch into a pro-capitalist Thatcherite.)

 

Is there a Thatcher that can save Gaul? Perhaps. French Interior Minister Nick Sarkozy is a strong law-and-order man. He's the one who ended the Muslim riots. More, he is reputed to be pro-market and pro-American. The question is, can Sarkozy wake up this nation of economic sleepwalkers and bring them into the 21st century? He ought to take a big paddle to the collective French fanny. They sure need it.

[Chronic Husker 85]

democrats are french commies

 

[Boz/BoFan 0]

democrats are french commies

 

 

Couldnt have said it better! And before any of you spout off about how brilliant the economy was under Clinton, it was successful in spite of Clinton not because of him. It was the Republican house which kept everything in check. Like i said, this is what America would look like if the Dems were left unchecked.

 

Conclusion? Why do we need them.....

[Chronic Husker 85]

Couldnt have said it better! And before any of you spout off about how brilliant the economy was under Clinton, it was successful in spite of Clinton not because of him. It was the Republican house which kept everything in check.

 

the republican house kept everything in check. they kept that tax and spend liberal from spending all our money!

 

[mobb_deep 917]

I'll take that over a nuclear winter anyday.

[Uh-huh 0]

 

the republican house kept everything in check. they kept that tax and spend liberal from spending all our money!

 

 

Brilliant!

[Boz/BoFan 0]

Its true.

[Artist Formerly Known as Big O 0]

Go back to your bunker, Chicken Little.

[hoytdwow 202]

This is irrefutable.....

[Greedo 13]

 

the republican house kept everything in check. they kept that tax and spend liberal from spending all our money!

 

 

Perhaps one of the dumbest things I've read in a while. The two sides worked together. And by the way, how's the GOP prez and GOP congress doing? Oh yeah - don't tax, but spend a ton more anyway and mortgage our kids' future! You're about as bright as the spendthrift morons currently in power (that would be the GOP, Einstein).

[Boz/BoFan 0]

Perhaps one of the dumbest things I've read in a while. The two sides worked together. And by the way, how's the GOP prez and GOP congress doing? Oh yeah - don't tax, but spend a ton more anyway and mortgage our kids' future! You're about as bright as the spendthrift morons currently in power (that would be the GOP, Einstein).

 

Spending is on par with most other administrations if you deduct war expenses. Wars are very expensive.

[mobb_deep 917]

Spending is on par with most other administrations if you deduct war expenses. Wars are very expensive.

 

and pointless (well this one atleast)...

[Isotopes 1]

Perhaps one of the dumbest things I've read in a while. The two sides worked together. And by the way, how's the GOP prez and GOP congress doing? Oh yeah - don't tax, but spend a ton more anyway and mortgage our kids' future! You're about as bright as the spendthrift morons currently in power (that would be the GOP, Einstein).

 

I don't think he was serious HTH

[parrot 789]

Spending is on par with most other administrations if you deduct war expenses. Wars are very expensive.

I see you've changed to "most" other administrations now. One might have thought you would see a reduction in non-defense spending once ostensibly conservative Republicans took hold of pretty much all the power Washington. Curiously, that hasn't happened. In fact it rocketed from the levels they had managed to acheive even when dealing with a Democratic President. Apparently the "Contract with America" was only binding until the Democrats were out of the picture.

[Chronic Husker 85]

I don't think he was serious HTH

[Uh-huh 0]

Spending is on par with most other administrations if you deduct war expenses. Wars are very expensive.

Yes, Reagan's. And Bush I.

 

Let's not get carried away here with the usual lies.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Yes, Reagan's. And Bush I.

 

Let's not get carried away here with the usual lies.

 

Clinton spent more than Reagan and Bush 1.

 

HTH

[Toro 1]

Everyone brings up Clinton.

 

Lets look at the previous democrats:

 

Carter.

 

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Bringing up Carter is hitting below the belt.

 

Even if you included every tin-horn dictator from every 3rd world shiathole country who calls himself "President", Carter would still be the worst President to ever take a breath.

[jerryskids 5,206]

I'm not getting into the democrat/repub thing. But it is clearly an example of why socialist policies fail in the long term.

[Boz/BoFan 0]

I'm not getting into the democrat/repub thing. But it is clearly an example of why socialist policies fail in the long term.

 

Yes the current Dem Vs. Rep bashing is out of hand and Im completely guilty of it but what do you think Dean, Pelosi, Kennedy, Clintons etc etc the current radical leaders of the party want? Why do you think you hear non stop, even from within their own party that the they dont have a platform or they have no solutions and run on nothing? The reason is, they have a platform, they just cant run on it or they would never be elected unless it was 1920's USSR. Like i said if left unchecked their initial slight tax increase will eventually grow, and grow, and grow ala France and Europe, the Dems current model. It is the nature of their system and "progressive" mindset. The "progressive" handle they love to throw around tells you exactly this. Do you think they will "progress" to less taxes and fewer social programs and hand outs, or more taxes and programs? This is their slope and it is very slippery.

 

They want it to build a stronger constituency who relies on the government, to get more votes, to gain more seats, to get more POWER. Their ultimate goal is power and will destroy america to get it. I have no prob with the Dems of 20, 15 or even 10 years ago, they had ideas and a legitiamte give and take with the Repubs. But the current strain is absolutely focking venomous.