(7j) French protests against pension reforms are likely against growing inequality

14/03/2023: Post at Facebook about French pension protests

How unions and journalists live in dreams instead of working with governments for good pension reforms. 

We know we live longer, whether we like that or not. And thus, pensions will become too expensive, but also boredom may settle in for many. Instead of union bosses who ask to be fired to show their members that is the way to have good benefits until their real retirement, they should explain employees and employers that, as we can enjoy a longer life, it is logic we need to work longer. 

How can unions contribute to good pension reforms? First by accepting we need to work longer. Then argue that pensions should be based not only on the final years of their earnings so workers can descent the career ladder, certainly when they finished paying their mortgage while their children left home. Of course, a certain age is not the only milestone as the length of the career, but also the toughness of a profession is important: someone who starts a tough job at 18 shouldn't work until 64 (in future France) when someone who studied until their 25 before working at a desk also works until 64. Still, a higher retirement age is likely only possible when the working system includes the possibility for everyone to take some time off from work during their career (as is already the case for many people) to avoid burnouts. 

When people are still fine at higher age, than they may not want to sit at home, and many travel to enjoy themselves. Still, those who want to stop too early can do so while use their savings for their self-proclaimed retirement, until they reach the age they can receive their pension. 

We live longer, unfortunately we will also have to work longer, or use our savings. If unions don't accept this, than pension reforms will be enforced upon us, without discussions. And yes, I know that not every politician, or businessleader wants to discuss pension reforms with unions.

23/03/2023 till today: More French protests after President Macron decided to force his pension reforms by ignoring Parliament

Protests against the pension reforms with an increase in pension age from 62 to 64 years continue in France, and this after President Macron ignored Parliament to vote on his reforms. Some protests became quite violent, some protesters even wanted to destroy a town hall. Of course, this can not be accepted. Still, protests continue and sometimes with violence against who seem to be friends of the elite. Still, in other countries such as Belgium the retirement age is already 67 years.

On the other hand, the French government says protests are accepted as long as they are nonviolent. Here is a problem: to approve necessary pension reforms, the government used a legislation whereby the electorate, and this via their Representatives in Parliament, has no possibility to propose changes to, or completely dismiss the pension reform as the President thinks will happen as he says opponents don't propose any alternative reforms themselves. Without those reforms, as people live longer (see Figures 1 and 2) and increasing numbers of people reach today's pension age so they will retire, the pension cost will continue to increase so the pension system may indeed collapse, and thus people feel the consequences of inaction. Unless of course, people are right and there is no problem. But, we also need to fear the collapse of banks that may bring down pension funds, and even the economy of countries, unless governments intervene as happened recently with Credit Suisse.  

But, as President Macron mentioned in his interview, those protests are probably not only about the increase of the retirement age. It is also, maybe mainly as the "yellow vests movement" already protested years ago, because of a growing inequality whereby an elite earns hundreds of thousands, some even millions of dollars a year, who will receive high pensions when they retire, while they tell those who earn much less that they can't even retire at an earlier age after the hard work many did. People also know that, not only will high earners receive better pensions, they were also able to invest during their working years such as in shares that many received from their company as bonus while they were able to buy houses that they rend out at a high price so that they will continue to live a life in wealth. In contrast, many ordinary people couldn't afford those items during their working years, or shares they had lost much of their value during the financial crisis, while now they are denied to retire early to profit from their remaining life. Indeed, statistics inform that people who had hard jobs, often in a less healthy environment, are likely to live shorter lives than those at jobs behind a desk while certainly those at the top live in general longer as they have better access to good food and healthcare; Donald Trump, President Jo Biden and President Putin are three example of men amongst many men and women who continue in their 70s.

Therefore, lists that mention what can be considered as hard labour jobs that justifies earlier retirement are important; these lists can change over time as new equipment results in easier jobs. But, while society as a whole needs to work longer, there should also be a minimum number of years that people need to work in addition to a minimum retirement age. Indeed, certain people start working at 18 year while others only start at 24 years - see Table 1. Further, few can work nonstop until their 64 or more without having a burnout, and thus breaks should be possible during people's career. 

As unions didn't negotiate good pension reforms when socialists were in power, but instead defended the current situation, now the elite, such as those who worked and work as investment bankers and earn a lot, come in power to enforce pension reforms, including on people with hard labour jobs. And thus people are angry and protest, certainly when the president removed what people believe is an expensive watch, a sign people are angry with people with money. 

Figure 1 Life expectancy in USA between 1900 and 1998. Source: Andrew Noymer's 1918 Flu Page - Figure 2 - The raw data in the website is here presented as line graph. It shows that between 1946 and 1979 the average life expectant for both men and women was between 64 till 70. However, since 1980, this increased gradually until now about 79.11 years, thus this is about 16 years above the proposed retirement age of 64. The life expectancy for men was years shorter than for women as they smoked, drunk, drove faster, but also worked often in bad conditions such as coal mines. 

Figure 2 Life expectancy in USA between 1950 and 2030. Source: Macrotrends U.S. Life expectancy. Interesting website as the projection of life expectancy in the USA can be seen up to year 2100 when the life expectancy will be nearly 89 years.

The USA can be used as example because it is only a moderate country in life expectancy whereby many Asian and European countries have an even higher life expectancy, such as 82.17 years in Belgium, 83.13 years in France, and even 85.03 in Japan. Of course, with the Universal Life Insurance (or Obamacare) in the USA, more people can afford to go to doctors and hospitals, and thus the life expectancy in the USA may go up much faster than at the current speed. 

Figure 3 The difference in numbers of years worked when people retire at 64 years. Some people stop school to start work at 18 years, often less well paid and harder jobs such as in the building sector versus people who study until 24 years and then start to work, often in better paid jobs and physically less tiring work, although using brains should not be underestimated as that too can result in burnouts. And in today's society, younger people take a sabbatical year before starting work to discover the planet. Thus, during this period society paid for people's education while didn't receive much in return.

As explained higher, the retirement age is now gradually increased. The example shows that it is important that people with heavy jobs have the retirement age and length of career adjusted to their work. Still, as even tough jobs become less tiring with increased automation, everyone will have to work longer gradually. 

The wealthy need to be proud they contribute to society Instead join the race to the top

Still, to keep pensions affordable, the rich will need to pay correctly their taxes and social security without the possibility to reduce taxes while the rich pay now less than those at the lower payment ladder while can even receive returns on dinners as Warren Buffett admits. 

If the wealthy don't want to contribute more and instead punish countries (such as Norway) that act a little, than they may indeed have reasons to fear "the people" and need to hide behind even higher walls around their houses or on their luxurious ships. Many know this, while the lower wealthy don't seem to understand as they don't want to lose what they claim was build-up during hard work or clever investment, so they defend the very rich as they enjoy some of the advantages but don't understand that the refusal of the rich to contribute their fair share to society endangers what everyone else have. 

And yes, tax reductions up to certain income and investments and their returns are acceptable to help people, until they reach a certain level so they proved they can look well after their own money, and increase it. This way, people will be stimulated to invest in companies. Not all rules should apply to everyone when it disadvantages people on moderate to low incomes while many of today's laws benefit the rich. Because when the majority finds it difficult to go out, almost every restaurant and pub and other businesses will feel a reduction in profits, even when they increase prices so even more people spend less in difficult times. 

Strange that in the country of the French Revolution, the wealthy still don't seem to understand that too much inequality is dangerous. In this, President Macron is right when he compared the protests with the storming of Congress in the USA: people everywhere are angry with the establishment who claim they are the only who work hard while e.g. cleaners too work hard, or we need to clean our own desk and floor at work. That is also the reason why more people vote extreme right and extreme left, two evils that result in an elite that pays employees as little as possible while block unions and democracy. 

When climate change will bite, and the cost of living will further rise, we can expect more troubles. Unless SOLIDARITY between the rich and everyone else allows that people can live in a house and buy food.