49 Comments

1. Jamie Irons:

Roger, you wrote:

For all their Bohemian bravura, the French are often the most conventional of people in their lifestyles and aspirations. Some people brand this a form of socialism, but I believe there is something more psychologically traditionalist or conformist in this. The socialism emerges from this essential conservatism, not the other way around.

I think this is true, and is a profound insight. It is also a rather compassionate view of the French, even though it would probably infuriate them.

This conservatism is evident, when you think about it, even in the fierce protectiveness of the French language, in the way, for example, our own poor effrots to speak French are met with such withering condescension.

Jamie Irons

Mar 29, 2006 - 7:37 am 2. Fausta:

Can you imagine wanting or even considering keeping your first job out of college for life?
It’s also a matter of not having a choice.
The way the law works, if you’re an employer, you have no reason at all to promote or transfer employees IF you take the risk of hiring them in the first place.
If you’re an employee, the only (almost!) way to get a different job is
1. through connections (a most important factor in French life, politics, and employment)
2. moving to another country.

Then there’s the problem of housing, too.
Rental laws are so restrictive that you can’t get an apartment without a work contract — since landlords can’t evict deadbeats.

So the result is that all the French want
a 35-hr workweek
a permanent job in which they serve time
a generous pension when they retire at age 60
seven/eight weeks vacations and numerous paid holidays
cradle-to-grave state-provided medical care, no matter how mediocre.

Many with entrepeneurial spirit, ambition, or desire to change their lot leaves. One instance: my hairdresser and his sister left France, opened a very successful chain of salons in the US & Mexico, and prospered beyond their dreams.
And they didn’t retire at 60, either.

Mar 29, 2006 - 8:13 am 3. Skookumchuk:

Can you imagine wanting or even considering keeping your first job out of college for life?

I know only one such person here in America – a career civil servant.

I agree with Jamie about your observation of how the conservatism drives the socialism. And it may be uniquely French. Would a Scandinavian want a guarantee of the same job for life in the same way as the French?

Mar 29, 2006 - 8:16 am 4. photoncourier.blogspot.com:

I think there’s a vicious-circle effect here: the restrictions on the labor market hold back economic expansion, which means that if you do lose your job, you’ll likely have a hard time getting another one. While, of course, leads people to call for more restrictions on the labor market…

Mar 29, 2006 - 9:04 am 5. David Thomson:

ÔøΩ”Some people brand this a form of socialism, but I believe there is something more psychologically traditionalist or conformist in this.ÔøΩ”

Oh my good, it appears that somebody needs to read the works of Daniel Bell and Irving Kristol. Socialism inevitably brings about a ÔøΩpsychologically traditionalist or conformistÔøΩ society. This is always the case. There are no exceptions. Capitalism is a liberal phenomenon. It relentlessly creates and destroys. Socialism is the enemy of the new. It offers non-threatening, existential comfort—in return for your freedom.

Mar 29, 2006 - 9:22 am 6. beautifulatrocities:

“Qu’est-ce que c’est ‘blog’?”

Mar 29, 2006 - 9:22 am 7. Erik:

Would a Scandinavian want a guarantee of the same job for life in the same way as the French?

Actually, the Scandinavian laws are very similar to the French ones in this area. France is frequently used as a good example to follow, and there are lots of people agreeing with the protesters…

Fortunally, I think the 35-hr workweek suggestion has lost a bit of steam in Scandinavia, but it’s still brought up from time to time.

Mar 29, 2006 - 9:41 am 8. Orson2:

Of course, Roger. THIS is another feudal holdover from the era of guild protectionism.

This means France has never become a truely liberal society in the essential economic sense that we in common law countries take for granted.

Mar 29, 2006 - 10:01 am 9. Anthony (Los Angeles):

Some people brand this a form of socialism, but I believe there is something more psychologically traditionalist or conformist in this. The socialism emerges from this essential conservatism, not the other way around.

Beyond conservative, I think it’s fundamentally reactionary. The French demonstrators are striving to keep things frozen as they are, with any reformist change fought tooth-and-nail. David has a good observation above that socialist economies produce conservative societies, because people become trapped in and dependent on the “social safety net.” France and Sweden are both cases where serious reform may be impossible without a total collapse making way for it.

Mar 29, 2006 - 10:20 am 10. mezzrow:

Yet there are those eager to take the USA down the same path. Read this review by Thomas Geoghegan, a labor lawyer and author, in today’s NYT. Interesting, the choice of reviewer for “The Disposable American” by Louis Uchitelle.

link

The path to a French economy begins with one step…

Mar 29, 2006 - 10:20 am 11. Robin Goodfellow:

I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. Communism and Socialism are fundamentally conservative, not radical. In reality they effect the preservation of a social order that is out of date. Specifically, they try to remove the dynamism and uncertainty from the industrial economy, by removing the pressures of competition on the worker, for example. However, that competition and dynamism is one of the driving forces of a healthy economy, so you lose quite a lot when you try to avoid it.

Mar 29, 2006 - 10:24 am 12. Kevin Peters:

Roger:

Months ago I read an article that described the uproar from the labor unions over another change in the benifits rights of French street and caberet entertainers. To get full employment benifits the mimes, night club singers and other forms of independent street performers had to show that they had at least 6 months of combined paid work in their field. Shockingly, the government wanted to make the requirement 8 months. Of course the mimes were outraged at this subhuman treatment. The very fact that the government was subsidizing street performers is absurd to begin with. Even worse was the notion that the government adjusted it to 8 months would bring protests. France needs a Thatcher to break the Unions otherwise these strikes will be never stop. The French government can’t continue with the staus qou. This doesn’t mean that the unions will be removed. They just won’t have the street veto over legislation. It’s not as if the current French leaders are trying to bring in Friedman economics to France. They can read the tea leaves and they know that they can’t afford the staus qou and they are trying to bring in minor changes. And the French populace are acting like two year olds who don’t want to go to bed.

Mar 29, 2006 - 10:53 am 13. Curmudgeon:

No doubt the average French worker wouldn’t mind changing jobs occasionally, if it didn’t involve the insecurity of having to quit one job and look for another. The choice is probably not between one job and a series of jobs, but rather a (possibly boring, but well paid) job and sustained periods of unemployment.

Mar 29, 2006 - 10:56 am 14. johnpagenola:

The main thoughts of the college students were best expressed by one young woman, “You’ll get a job knowing that you’ve got to do every single thing they ask you to do because otherwise you may get sacked.”

Mar 29, 2006 - 10:58 am 15. frenchfregoli2:

All the above comments are valid in their own way, but the issue is broader than this latest “law”.

As a free market policies advocate myself, i view this law as a complete nonesense.Just to name a few idiocies, it applies to EVERYONE under 26!I think there is ground to libel it as “age” discriminatory; then it makes a TWO year probation period mandatory (during which you can be fired with no reason given, not even verbaly).Why such a long probation? Why prevent the employer to give a reason for firing you, even as a courtesy?

Predictably, no-one will ever rent a flat, or grant a loan to anyone under 26, if they have no other collateral than their work, ie, parents.

French laws have succeeded , during the past 30 years or so, in creating a segragated society, with “privilged” job holders (low pay but somewhat falsly secure), “kleenex” employees with low income and little hope of joining the previous group, etc..

This law or other attempts are bound to fail because we need to flaten 30 years of legislations from job laws, to housing , banking and entrepreunial regulations.

And that my friends, is what i call, well, a REVOLUTION!

Mar 29, 2006 - 11:24 am 16. markus:

I agree that European socialism, what I prefer to call social democracy, has many socially conservative aims. Whether this is an advantage or disadvantage to a nation depends on the culture and character of its people. The most inspiring social-economic system that I know of is Finland, which in addition to a social welfare state nearly as extensive as that of Sweden, has the best education system in the world, a very productive labor force, and a good deal of entrepreneurialism. And it has also largely embraced globalization. I wonder how many Finns think their country is going in the right direction, compared to the latest U.S. poll, which has about 26 percent of us sharing this view.

Mar 29, 2006 - 11:26 am 17. ex-democrat:

it looks like that’s not the only thing they embrace, markus. http://crabba.nomadlife.org/2005/05/alcohol-policy-in-finland.html

Mar 29, 2006 - 11:58 am 18. markus:

During the winter in Finland, sun rises aprox 10 am, sets aprox 3 pm. Who wouldn’t drink a lot?

Mar 29, 2006 - 12:02 pm 19. Curmudgeon:

frenchfregoli2 touches upon a point that I think has been glossed over a bit in the news coverage. Of course the rioters are spoiled and arrogant, but they do have a point: why should all the pain of adjustment fall on them? Given the absurd levels of unemployment in France, I can imagine a situation analogous to the postdoc-intern abuse sometimes seen in this country, but writ much larger. There will always be a fresh crop of youngsters coming along who can be assigned all the work, then mostly terminated just before they become “tenured”, while an ever dwindling group of privileged oldsters sit around on their butts handing out orders.

Mar 29, 2006 - 12:06 pm 20. Fausta:

Markus,
While you may find Finland’s social-economic system inspiring, the fact is that the country has a population of 5.2 million, with substantial timber and metal natural resources and a modern, competitive economy.

Mar 29, 2006 - 12:14 pm 21. John Lynch:

I lived and worked in France on and off for a number of years, totaling about 5 years.

While I can’t say that I ever got fully drawn in to the way of thinking and the sense of entitlement I now see exhibited, I can offer a few insights.

First, after school, come a number of internships, trial contracts, and other forms of temporary work assignments. These are not full employment, often do not pay well, and the period of accepting this kind of work is kept as brief as possible by the new workforce entrant.

This period is meant for the new worker to try differing companies, or differing positions (all entry level,) as a precursor to determining what they want and are able to do in the workforce. For the companies, this period allows them to test-drive the new worker without a long term commitment. Again for the worker, it allows some beefing up on the C.V. (resume,) to become attractive to the desired employers.

Second, the employers operate in differing manners. Over 50% of employment is government or state-owned. These operate in the job-for-life mode. Other companies are operations of non-French companies (HP, Microsoft, IBM, etc.) These companies operate on an amalgam of different laws and policies. Hiring and firing is possible, if somewhat expensive.

Third, there is a certain amount of cynicism in the actual cause of protests, riots, and other public disruptions. Sometimes it is more about the ability to disrupt than it is about the stated cause. It should be taken with a significant grain of salt that the protest is about the CPE (jobs act) as opposed to the assertion of power of the union and student bodies.

None of these insights materially alter the view that the love of things French drives socialist behaviors to the detriment, at least in our view, of capitalist functions, self-determined roles in society, and freedom (as we define it.)

Mar 29, 2006 - 12:31 pm 22. Joe Schmoe:

I am with the students all the way on this one.

I really feel for them. The same thing they are complaining about is happening right here in the US, albeit to a much, much lesser degree, thanks to our free market system. But I’m feeling it, and so are others my age.

In France, the priviliged Baby Boomers are changing the rules and screwing their own children. Mom and Dad have jobs and job security. The kids are unemployed, and now the elders are trying to take away the job security of those lucky enough to be employed. I’d be pissed too.

Of course, the whole notion of “job security” as it exists in France is fundamentally incompatable with free market capitalism, and is one of the reasons why the economy is doing so poorly. But this legislation doesn’t require everyone to shoulder their share of the short-term pain that will inevitably accompany big changes in the system. No, it foists the entire burden onto the shoulders of the kids.

Similar things are happening right here in the US. Housing prices are skyrocketing, jobs are unstable as hell, people getting out of school (even the Ivy League) no longer go straight to an entry-level adult job, everyone has to “temp” nowadays, white collar occupations are now getting outsourced along with the steel mills and auto factories.

I am not saying that the older generation didn’t have to work hard to achieve the things they have. Of course they did, and I honor and respect their accomplishments. And I realize that many of the things our elders enjoy came to them after years of hard work and deferred gratification, a lot of them drove beaters for years before stepping up to that Lexus.

But what I am saying is that young people today cannot achieve the same results with the same amount of work. For example the “starter” homes that my Boomer coworkers live in all cost between $900k and $1.5mm. There is no way, not in a million years, that I can afford to buy one of those places. They could when they were my age, but not me. And our salaries are comparable! Everyone over the age of, say, 45 seems to have had around two, and no more than three, jobs. Everyone I know aged 35 and under has had three or four, one guy is on his sixth. And these are “career” jobs, the one you had tending bar back in college doesn’t count, by that measure I’ve probably had 30.

Social Security privitazation? Sounds great to me, especially since the average 50 year old only has a balance of around $20k in their 401(k). A lot of them still have mortgages, too, the idea of “simplifying” and squirlling it away for the twilight years does not seem to have much appeal to the Boomers. They’re blowing money they should be saving on custom Harley-Davidsons and 4,000 square foot miniature mansions. What happens when the music stops? They’ll reach into MY pocket, that’s what.

So I understand where the kids are coming from. If I lived in France, I’d be right out there with them. The system needs to be changed, but basica principles of fairness require everyone in France to share the pain. Instead, the Boomers are screwing their own kids. We’re used to this, of course — it’s happened before, what with the divorces and all — but you’d better believe the kids are going to complain about it. This sort of thing will get worse in the future, BTW, and so will the protests, I am sorry to say. I hope we can avoid really bad stuff here in the US, but at the rate things are going I frankly doubt it.

Mar 29, 2006 - 1:19 pm 23. Terrye:

Joe:

This is satire right?

I had a real estate license for years…hated every minute of it… and I never once met a young couple who would even look at a house like the one I lived in when I got married.

Oh nooooooo, that sort of dump was not good enough for them..Time and again I would try to get young people to buy within their means and you would have thought that I asked them to live in the back of a pick up truck in a junk yard.

I don’t live in a house that is worth a million bucks. I live in sall town Indiana, I have never even seen a house worth a million bucks around here.

My first job out of school was working in a dry cleaners for minimus wage and I can actually remember recessions. Real recessions, where there were no jobs. Forget medical benefits, I am talking a job, what we needed to keep a roof over our heads and feed ourselves because our parents actually told us to hit the road when we adults.

sheesh.

Mar 29, 2006 - 2:11 pm 24. Larry J:

Similar things are happening right here in the US. Housing prices are skyrocketing, jobs are unstable as hell, people getting out of school (even the Ivy League) no longer go straight to an entry-level adult job, everyone has to “temp” nowadays, white collar occupations are now getting outsourced along with the steel mills and auto factories.

Graduating from college, even the exaulted “Ivy League”, is no guarantee of getting a job. More than anything else, a person needs marketable job skills. If you don’t have something of value to offer an employer, you aren’t going to have much luck getting a job.

Temp jobs are one way for someone to gain those marketable job skills. Look at it as an opportunity to prove yourself and gain skills instead of complaining.

Social Security privitazation? Sounds great to me, especially since the average 50 year old only has a balance of around $20k in their 401(k). A lot of them still have mortgages, too, the idea of “simplifying” and squirlling it away for the twilight years does not seem to have much appeal to the Boomers. They’re blowing money they should be saving on custom Harley-Davidsons and 4,000 square foot miniature mansions. What happens when the music stops? They’ll reach into MY pocket, that’s what.

There are too many people who look to retirement (if they think that far ahead at all) as someone else’s responsibility. Fortunately, not all of us are that way. I turn 49 next month. Everything I own (house, cars, and an airplane) is paid for and I’m 100% debt free. My 401K is approaching $200K and my net worth is approaching $1.1M. You see, my retirement plan assumes that I won’t get a dime from Social (In)Security. If I’m right, then I’m prepared. If I’m wrong, then I’ll have more money than I anticipated. Not all Boomers (and I’m sick of hearing all their self-absorbed whinning, too) are stuck in 1968.

Job security hasn’t been very secure for anyone. I was let go from a job that I’d held for 13 years and had to start all over at age 35. That really sucked, but paying my dues paid off in the long term.

Also, if the housing prices are too high and job prospects where you live aren’t good, you should consider moving. My youngest son lives in San Diego where home prices are about 3-4 times higher than here in Colorado Springs. While San Diego is a wonderful town, there’s no way I’d ever live there. It simply costs too much. If you’re unwilling to consider relocating, then suck it up and quit complaining. Most of the limitations we face in life are self-imposed.

Mar 29, 2006 - 2:38 pm 25. Joe Schmoe:

Terrye-

No, I am serious. A lot of this depends on where you live. Stuff like housing prices isn’t a problem in Indiana, we have friends in Indy and Fort Wayne who have lovely houses that cost maybe $150k, $160k. Here in SoCal, you can’t even find a house in Compton for under $300k. I am absolutey serious, go to Realtor.com and do a serach for single family homes in Zip Code 90222 and see for yourself. Note that a lot of the cheaper 2 bedroom homes are only 550 square feet on 0.05 acre lots!

Sure, people who live in CA can expect to pay more than those in Indiana. But I have a good job, I should be able to afford more than a place in Compton. I can’t, though. And for all of the Boomers telling me that they had to start out small — BS. Not one of them had to live in Compton. A “gentrifying” neighborhood maybe, a smaller, older home, sure, Compton, no. Also, we aren’t living in sunny CA becuase we are selfish hedonists, we live here becuase my wife’s parents, who are in their 80’s, live here, and we do not want to separate them from the grandkids.

I knew that I would provoke a lot of ire with this comment but I really mean what I said. Things really are a lot harder today. I’m not saying it wasn’t hard then, becuase it was; but it is harder now.

A few months ago one of my older friends at work saw me brown-bagging my lunch. I do this almost every day. He knew I wanted to buy a house. Do you know what he said to me? “Saving up for a down payment, eh?” He meant well but I wanted to strangle him. Oh, yeah, I am probably saving $1800 per year by brown-bagging my lunch. Hey, if I cut the cable service and get rid of the cell phone, I could make that $3,000! At that rate, in only THIRTY YEARS I’ll have a 20% down payment on a 50 year-old (well, by then it will be 80 years old) $500,000 2BR/1BA 750 sq foot single family home in a decrepit, but not dangerous, neighborhood.

I don’t normally talk about this stuff (I think i alluded to it once) because it is a personal subject that I do not care to discuss with others. However, in this case, I thought it was pertinent. I can understand why these young people are angry. The French legislation is BS, it is screwing the young,

Mar 29, 2006 - 2:52 pm 26. Joe Schmoe:

Ah, Larry J chimes in with typical Boomer response #1: Suck it up and quit complaining! You young slackers don’t know how good you have it! I never had an Ipod or a cell phone at your age! (as if these things are substitutes for a house, a pension, or job security.)

Wonder how long it will be before someone else makes Boomer response #2: Just hang in there! I too had it tough at your age! It may seem impossibe, but before you know it you’ll be rolling in clover! In a few years things will turn around, you will see!

When I told my boss that I was leaving my last job, he went on almost exactly the same rant about “my generation.” It was entirely spontaneous, I told him that I liked it there but was leaving for personal reasons. Now mind you, I was the third person in his mid 30’s to leave in less than two months becuase of the high cost of housing. Do you know what he called us? “Impatient.” Naturally, this guy had a house when he was in his mid 30’s, but folks today who want THE SAME THING are just impatient! We don’t know how good we have it, we need to hang in there.

Guess my McMansion and Harley remark cut a little too close to home, huh? Larry, I am glad that you are one of the good ones. But you cannot deny that: (a) millions upon millions upon millions of your peers are behaving exactly as I described; and (b) the WWII generation did not behave this way. My remarks about Boomers are crude generalizations, and there are many exceptions to the rule, including most everyone here, but as a general rule they are true.

And with respect to the future, just what DO you think the generation of breast implants and tanning salons is going to do when they discover that a $500 increase in their monthly Social Security check, one they badly need becuase their prolifigate habits left them without savings, is just a vote away? They’ll raise my taxes, that’s what they’ll do. In fact, Larry J has basically admitted that he thinks this will happen, becuase his retirement plans assume that Social Security will not be available.

Anyway, this is why I do not bring this subject up very often. You people will not understand, you’ll write me off as an ungrateful, spoiled whiner or someone who lacks the wisdom to see that his circumstnaces are only temporary. It’s what you always do. I am telling you this know because I do understand where young people in France are coming from. You may feel a little guilty about the new reality but it is a fact of life.

Mar 29, 2006 - 3:06 pm 27. Joe Schmoe:

I am not saying that the Boomers didn’t have to start out small or make sacrifices. What I am saying is that people today have to start out even smaller and make sacrifices that are several orders of magnitude greater.

To illustrate, suppose I lose an arm. A Boomer might tell me “quit whining! I cut my thumb once!” Another might say “it’ll heal and then you’ll barely notice it,” not understanding that a missing arm won’t grow back and that a prothesis is no substitute.

Anyway, I will now retire from my self-appointed role as spokesperson for Angry French Youth.

Mar 29, 2006 - 3:18 pm 28. Terrye:

JOe:

Larry is not a typical boomer. I live in an 1100 sq foot house and probably make a lot less than you do.

Mar 29, 2006 - 3:41 pm 29. ic:

“Similar things are happening right here in the US. Housing prices are skyrocketing, jobs are unstable as hell, people getting out of school (even the Ivy League) no longer go straight to an entry-level adult job, everyone has to “temp” nowadays, white collar occupations are now getting outsourced along with the steel mills and auto factories.”

Have you thought of renting an apartment? I shared a studio apt. in a dump in North Chicago along a railroad with my sister right out of college. I graduated from Duke with a Computer Science degree. So why is it such a big deal that Ivy Leaguers don’t get a job right away. Why are they entitled to jobs just because they have spent their sizable inheritance to get their liberal arts degrees? If they were really smart, they would have used that money as a down payment for a decent apt., then get a technical, marketable degree from a state u.

Jobs are never stable. My husband who holds 5 degrees including an MS in Computer Sc. from the U of Michigan at Ann Arbor, a PhD in Nuclear Chemistry, an MBA from the U of Chicago. He was let go on average every five to ten years. The companies simply folded because of competitions. There is nothing the companies can do if their products are out dated. You as a worker has to just move on. That is why I support any politicians who promise tax-cuts. You save for your own rainy days, for your own retirements. You should never expect anybody to look after you. Why should they?

Whitecollar outsourcing: why should only factory workers lose their jobs?

If we start passing laws to protect our jobs, our economy will go down the drain like the French’s. The only relevant law is the Law of Supply and Demand. There’s nothing any govt. can do about it. Buckle up and have a wild ride. It’s life.

Mar 29, 2006 - 3:44 pm 30. Kevin Peters:

Joe:

It sounds like you are a hard working person and I admire that you want your children to live near their grandkids. But individual area’s property values can’t be regulated and you live in an area that everyone wants to live in, that drives the price up. For good or for bad people in america have had to pick up and leave areas that they grew up in to go to states where their future prospects are better. “I should be able to…Compton”. Why? How would you decide who gets to live in which location and at what price. You have made a choice to live in a pricey area and it looks like it was for noble reasons, not because you are a “hedonist.” I have been predicting that the So.Cal housing bubble was going to explode for the last ten years and for the last ten years I have been 100% wrong. That is the way it is. Keeping the kids nears the grandparents is a great thing but housing costs have been outstripping salaries for the last decade and that is the reality of the free market. Southern California is an expensive place to live. The Bay area is worse. If you choose to live there you are going to continue to pay for it. I understand your frustration. France’s economic policy would not help you.

Mar 29, 2006 - 3:48 pm 31. Larry J:

Joe,

If you take the weight of that chip off of our shoulder for a few minutes, it might ease the pressure on your brain. One problem I’ve seen with a lot of people from your generation is that you expect to start out at the same standard of living that it took your parents decades to achieve. Believe me, when my wife and I married 23 years ago while still in college, we started out with a monthly income of less than $400. Even adjusted for inflation, that comes to about a $800 a month today (using the inflation calculator available here. That just isn’t much money but we worked through it. We enjoy a very nice standard of living but it took us over 20 years to get here.

My wife and I got where we are today though education and hard work. There were no shortcuts for us and we had some major setbacks along the way. However, those lessons in money management that we learned while struggling newlyweds set the path for us to get where we are now.

It’s your choice to live where you do. If the housing prices are too high for you then you can either rent while trying to save for a down payment or you can consider moving somewhere with a more reasonable cost of living. As long as you choose to live where you do, all your complaining comes across as nothing more than whinning about a choice that you yourself made.

As for Social Security, it has always been a Ponzi scheme and it’ll have to collapse sooner or later. Those who take no actions to prepare for their own old age and who expect to live off of Social Security are in for a rude letdown. Politically, I don’t expect that the politicians will actually let Social Security collapse. Instead, they’ll probably incorporate some form of means testing (anyone who saved for their own retirement would be disqualified from SS) or, probably more likely, they’ll give the SS check with one hand and tax it away with the other.

You’re still young enough to provide for yourself. Time is the biggest factor on your side and compound interest is one of the most powerful forces around. If you aren’t putting away as much as you can into something like a 401K and/or Roth IRA, then you’re making a serious mistake. I’m actually looking forward to turning 50 next year so I can increase the amount of money that I’m putting into my 401K and Roth IRA. Like I said before, I had to start all over at age 35 and I’ll never be able to make up for those lost years, but my wife and I are saving like crazy now (~35-40% of our total income). We’re on the home stretch to retirement and I hope to at least double my net worth before then. I already have 2 grandchildren and have another due in June. I don’t plan on being a burden on my kids or grandkids in my old age. At the same time, I’m enjoying the hell out of life now. I’m older than my father ever lived to be so I don’t take anything for granted.

Mar 29, 2006 - 5:38 pm 32. lindenen:

Joe, your story reminds me of this one I read about involving the Boomer parents, their Gen X kids and their kids, who all lived in one house because the Gen Xers couldn’t afford to buy a home despite making salaries that would guarantee an incredibly large home in most parts of the country. If I were you, I’d ask the grandparents if they’d consider moving out of California, unless they’re too old to be moved. It’s not like people fleeing California is something new.

Mar 29, 2006 - 7:08 pm 33. Sandy P:

–Can you imagine wanting or even considering keeping your first job out of college for life? –

What do you think a living wage does?

Meets peoples’ basic needs, no real encouragement to do better.

Mar 29, 2006 - 8:27 pm 34. HA:

Markus,

The most inspiring social-economic system that I know of is Finland

Finland isn’t a nation. Its a tribe with cell phones.

According to the CIA World Factbook, Finland had a GDP of $191 billion if you use the “official exchange rate” and $158 billion based on actual purchasing power. Meanwhile, Finland’s largest company Nokia had revenue of $41 billion. That means that a single company accounts for somwhere between 21% and 26% of the Finnish economy.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/fi.html
http://www.google.com/finance?q=NOK

Some model. What happens to Finland Nokia gets beat in the market?

When you run out of countries to find inspiration in, might I suggest you take a look at your own?

Mar 30, 2006 - 4:22 am 35. rosignol:

…I had no idea, until these recent demonstrations, that their first jobs out of school came with a no-firing clause.

80

>>>>>

I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. Communism and Socialism are fundamentally conservative, not radical. In reality they effect the preservation of a social order that is out of date.
-Robin Goodfellow

That’s not conservative, it’s reactionary. I’ll grant that conservatives can be reactionary, but the terms are by no means synonyms.

Mar 30, 2006 - 5:14 am 36. Joe Schmoe:

So, I guess California is off limits for anyone under 35, huh? Because that’s exactly what you are saying.

And it’s not just California…these days, housing prices are astronomical on the entire West Coast, plus AZ and NV, the entire East Coast (Florida and everything north of Virginia). What does a decent house cost in a non-dangerous DC neighborhood these days, $500-$600k?

This is exactly the kind of thing I am talking about. The Boomers just don’t get it. When you were coming up, “living in a cheaper neighborhood” meant adding 20 minutes to your commute in order to get a place you could afford. For me, it means moving out of the state. Entire regions of the country are suddenly off limits for all those under a certain age. But hey, I’ve got an Ipod, why am I complaining?

A word about me. I grew up in a lower middle class suburb of Chicago. My dad drove a cab and also worked as a garbage man and as a janitor at a shopping mall. He was a convicted felon, a registered sex offender (and a great father.) My mother is a nurse in a health clinic that caters to illegal aliens. When I was a child, my family lived in shitty apartments and got evicted twice. So don’t tell me about my pampered youth and “standard of living it took my parents decades to achieve.” The apartments I have lived in are WORSE than anything my parents ever rented, and I do not have a prison record and work as a lawyer, not a cab driver.

My parents did not contribute anything to the cost of my college education, though during my sophomore year my dad won $4,000 at the racetrack and gave it to me. I lost all of my financial aid for the next year as a result. I put myself through the state university by working three jobs, 70 hours per week during the academic year while carrying a full load of classes (yes really.) I then went to a top five law school.

Althogh I did well in school, I graduated with no job and $150,000 in student loans. I temped for $12.00/hour and went back home to Chicago to live with my mother for a year becuase I could not afford to pay my student loans and get a place of my own. I had to do that for two years, although evenually I got higher paying temp jobs. Eventually, I got a “good” permanent job. It was a good job, too, by most measures, it just didn’t pay very much. I then rented a studio apartment for $500/month. My neighbors were people from the hills of West Virginia with no teeth (there is actually a bad Patrick Swayze movie about this unique Chicago neighborhood called “Next of Kin.”)

Today I work as an entertainment lawyer in Beverly Hills, California and cannot afford a house. And no, I am not taking a pay cut to work in the glamorous entertainment industry — until recently I was an antitrust lawyer and earned even less.
I am telling you about my education and work history in order to emphasize the fact that I already have a good job. Only a handful of people my age are doing better. And I don’t see how I can get a better job. I mean, if I was working in a steel mill I could always go back to school and acquire more marketable skills. But I’ve already got the skills, and I have a good job and make a good living. I work hard and make a lot of money for my employer. It’s just that none of this pays enough to buy a house in a neighborhood where the murder rate is not a concern.

We have two children and live in a one-bedroom apartment that costs $765/month. I am now 34 years old. However, there is no way in hell that I can buy a single family home anywhere in California, or pretty much any of the other populous areas, for that matter.

Let’s see a show of hands from the Boomers: how many of you lived in a one-bedroom apartment at the age of 34 with your wife and two kids? Anyone? Anyone?

Now, I will be the first to admit that my story is a little extreme. But my story is also instructive. If I can’t make it here, just who the hell can? I mean, if the Beverly Hills entertainment lawyers are priced out, exaclty who can afford to live here? But you Boomers should just go on congratulating yourselves about rising property values and taking out home equity loans…

Moreover, I’m not alone. My run-down apartment building has four, count them, three families consisting of people in their 30’s with children. (There are eight apartments in the building all told.) The people upstairs also live in a one-bedroom and are expecting their second child. There are a LOT of us out there, if only the Boomers could be bothered to look.

But I know, nothing has changed, you too had it tough, the Gen-Xers are just impatient and expect too much too soon…

What do I want? I want what you’ve got! The guy in the next office does exactly the same job as me, and earns about the same salary. But he lives in a house, one he bought when he was my age, not a one-bedroom apartment. Now, this may sound like a deisre that is inconsistent with the fundamental principles of capitalism to you, but to me it’s about basic principles of fairness, equal pay for equal work and all that.

What do I want the government to do about this? Nothing, really. I don’t think the current state of affairs was caused by government intervention, it is more a function of demographics and attitudes. It would be nice if zoning and new residential housing development restrictions were relaxed in some of the pricier parts of the country, but I don’t even think that would solve the whole problem.

What do I plan to do myself? Well, my eldest will be ready for school in two years, and then I will make the agonizing decision of whether to move and either deprive my in-laws of the ability to see their grandkids or, in the event that they are willing to accompany us, separate these elderly Hispanics who don’t speak much English from everything familiar, dragging them along to a place like Ohio, at the age of 83.

But I am absolutely certain about two things: (a) the economy is a lot worse for the young these days than it was 20 years ago, no question about it, the system is not working in our favor; and (b) I’ll fight any efforts by the governemnt to make my life even harder — for instance, raising my taxes to pay for more Social Security benefits for the Boomers — tooth and nail. If I were in France I’d be tearing up the paving stones and manning the baracades right now.

Mar 30, 2006 - 6:04 am 37. Joe Schmoe:

Sorry the above should read “four, count them, four families…” (I forgot to include our family in the first count)

Mar 30, 2006 - 6:07 am 38. Bostonian:

Joe Schmoe,

It’s a HUGE mistake to conflate California with the rest of the country.

Believe it or not, but east of California, things really are different.

Mar 30, 2006 - 6:41 am 39. photoncourier.blogspot.com:

Joe…a few thoughts:

1)A lot of the housing problem has to do with zoning requirements and excessive environmental restrictions.
2)I think it’s very likely that housing prices will come down, at least inflation-adjusted terms, over the next couple of years. There will, of course, be great regional variations.
3)The kind of “tearing up the paving stones and manning the barricades” now being done in France will not help the problem; it will make it worse. If someone were thinking about locating a business, or a division of a business, in France, would the attitudes demonstrated in these riots encourage him to do it, or not to do it?

Mar 30, 2006 - 7:25 am 40. Danny Lemieux:

Joe – It is no accident that your struggles are in California – a socialist state with sky-high property values…just like France! Taxation and environmental controls have concentrated a limited supply of property into the hands of the wealthy few. Demand far exceeds supply, resulting in most people being priced out of the market. I am approaching retirement and have accummulated property and savings by pointedly staying away from areas like Southern Cal (like la belle France, it’s a great place to visit, though). Many Californians (like the French) are emigrating to more Anglo-Saxon Capitalist economies like Nevada, Utah, Arizona and Colorado. You’re educated and you’re talented. It sounds like you have options but do not want to make the hard choices.

Mar 30, 2006 - 7:26 am 41. Joe Schmoe:

Bostonian-

It is differenet in the rest of the country, I admit that. But it’s not *that* different. I could afford something in my native Chicago, for example.

But even there, it’s harder for the younger set. When I worked in Chicago, one of the partners I worked for bought a second home, and I handled the closing. For some reason he had to get an appraisal of his first home, though he was not selling it, and I saw a copy. His first house was nice, but nothing spectacular. A two story SFH in a nice neighborhood with good schools. Not a mansion, not a place in the fashionable part of town, nothing special, just a nice home, the American dream all the way. I discovered that he first bought it when he was my age, 28, shortly after starting work at the firm. Our backgrounds were quite similar, he too had come from modest circumtances and had worked his way up.

The house cost $400,000. There was no way in hell that I could buy it on my salary. I didn’t have a 20% downpayment of $80,000. I didn’t earn enough money to make the mortgage payments. Hell, I couldn’t even GET a mortgage for half the amount (when your student loan paymets are $1,200 per month, it really limits your borrowing power.)

Mind you, this is Chicago, a place where RE prices have been fairly stable. It’s not a boom town, there has been no massive growth, so it’s not like he bought a place in a gentrifying neighborhood and rode a wave of appreciation. Nope. Things were simply easier at his age than they are for me.

Yes, in Chicago I could get something. But it sure as hell won’t be as nice as what the Boomers got when — this is important — they were my age.

Since I have joined the professional workforce about 10 years ago, stuff like this has only gotten worse. For instance, my old boss’s house is probably $600,000 today.

Sure, it’s easier outside of CA. But it’s still hard. It’s not just CA. The same thing is happening pretty much everywhere. The standard of living of today’s young people is lower than that of their parents. In my case it’s a lot lower, partially due to where I live, but it’s still lower in the rest of the country. And for the Bomoers, it was higher! The starter home they boguht was often a lot nicer than the one the WWII generation started out in. A whole lot nicer.

And Daniel-

Did you have to drag your 80 year-old in-laws accross the country to a completely strange place just so you could buy a house? Did you? Yes, I will have to make that “hard choice” in a couple of years. But YOU, my friend, did NOT have to make it, and that is my whole point. Things are harder today. And I’m not happy about it.
happening all over the country.

The Boomers never had to temp upon getting out of school. You could afford a place earlier in life than we could. I work just as hard as the Boomers do but have a lower standard of living and less security.

But in just a few years, they will start reaching for MY wallet when they begin to feel the unpleasant effects of their total failure to plan for retirement. In France, it’s already happening. That’s why I feel for the youth there. The Boomers get to live under the old system. They don’t have to make any sacrifices. If they are so worried about youth unemployment, maybe some of them could retire early or take a pay cut. But no! Instead, they (predicatably) ask the young to make all of the sacrifices while they sacrifice nothing. Again, I agree that the system needs to be changed, but EVERYONE should make sacrifices, not just the youngsters.

Anyway, just thought I’d contribute a different perspective.

Mar 30, 2006 - 9:44 am 42. Kevin Peters:

Joe:

Your friends on the barricade are not fighting to dismantle the unworkable system that is going to dump the entire bill on the youth of the future.They are fighting to keep the status qou. You are right abouy social security. You are going to be taxed to death. And the longer the system is kept as is your bill is going to get bigger. And the longer you wait the bigger the population that counts on the broken system is going to be making it harder to vote in changes.If you think the AARP is powerfull now just wait another 20 years and be afraid. If the youth of France were fighting to dismantle the nanny style cradle to grave government straightjacket you would be smart to join the barricades. But they are fighting to keep things the same, thus sealing their fate. You sound like a hard working smart guy. Your right , It’s not fair. Forget fairness, look at the facts, and make a tough choice. The surrounding states are far cheaper then California. My nephew, with no college degree, moved to Nevada, got an entry level construction job, got married, has a kid, bought a house, is planning to buy another small condo for rental income. This took 13 years. He is 34. He got out of SoCal because he could count. You have a very hard choice. I understand if you stay for your in-laws and your grandkids. And I admire your thoughtfullness. But if you stay you are going to be paying a large mortgage for a small house. L.A. and Orange County housing prices are high and complainng about it won’t change a thing.I would be frustrated too. You can stay and accept your fate. You can move out of an area that has housing prices that are beyond your reach and won’t be coming down anytime soon. And you can wake up your agegroup about the coming demographic tax crush that is headed your way and get them to quit fighting for the federal life boat that you are being promised and that will leave you stranded. The youth of France are fighting for the wrong thing, a status qou that can’t be sustained and will only leave them footing the bill.The current system has given them a 24% unemployment rate. Why on earth would they be fighting to keep it.

Mar 30, 2006 - 9:57 am 43. Joe Schmoe:

Kevin, you are right. I have came to that conclusion a while ago. I no longer feel as angry as I used to.

You hit it right on the head, it may be unfair, and I may have a right to be angry, but the facts are facts and bellowing in rage at my circumstances won’t actually change a thing. It still sucks, especially when I see an ad for an $850,000 “starter home” in the newspaper, but I try not to let it get to me so much any more.

But I wanted to bring up this subject here becuase it is a real issue, one that will get much bigger in the future, and most Boomers seem totally unaware of it. The reason why I made these vituperative posts is to give the people just a little taste of the rage I, and others of my generation, sometimes feel. (And this is the sanitized version, believe it or not; I could wax even more maudlin if I wanted to.)

The housing market will probably tank, and if I move away I’ll probably be happier, but the underlying problems are only going to get worse. You are going to hear a lot more stuff like this in the future. Just wait until the Boomers start raising our taxes; then even those folks my age who live in affordable places will start howling. The French are farther along this path, but it will happen here too.

The young are going to get mighty angry at the old, there is no doubt about it, and my hope is that by thinking about this our generations can come to some sort of accomodation that will limit the damage. Maybe this will be possible if we start thinking about it right away.

Mar 30, 2006 - 10:26 am 44. Ripper:

I think that in the things that matter to them most (at least in their personal lives) most leftists are essentially conservative.

Mar 30, 2006 - 12:14 pm 45. Insufficiently Sensitive:

“The French legislation is BS, it is screwing the young…”

Horse pucky. In all the discussion above, I haven’t seen one reference to the giant unemployment rate of France, nor one suggestion toward any other method of dealing with it, other than the law now proposed.

It’s French socialism that is screwing the young, via short-term policies that looked good once (supergenerous welfare and unemployment benefits, unlimited immigration to attract garbage workers), but are in the long term being recognized as unsustainable. The generation that voted itself all these benefits is aging out of the workforce, and they all but quit having kids back in the lush 60s and 70s, so there’s a huge shortage of employed Frenchmen to tax.

The over-regulated PRIVATE businesses of France (that’s about half of its GDP, the gummint owns the other half already) haven’t got the freedom to make rational decisions about expanding and contracting their workforce. Hiring a punk is the same as marrying him/her. So the rational decision is to avoid hiring in all but the most favorable circumstances. And the closest the punks can come to ‘rational’ is to chuck rocks at the police – if they aren’t being beaten and looted by the kids of those garbage workers.

Yeah, I know, egalite trumps liberte in the socialist hierarchy, so we’re watching the economic collapse of the Soviet Union all over again. Can’t have liberte in the hands of private business.

Mar 30, 2006 - 1:09 pm 46. Sandy P:

–The most inspiring social-economic system that I know of is Finland,–

Finland???

Not from a bit I saw on the BBC – 7 countries worried about unemployment – Finland was 1.

Mar 30, 2006 - 4:07 pm 47. Bad Cat Robot:

I just turned 40. I bought my first house, in the Seattle area, two years ago. I still have savings, which is a good thing because my house is a “fixer.” (one reason I could afford it) I don’t think Social Security will be around when I get to it. Joe Schmoe has some justifiable anger, but it isn’t all justified in my opinion. And I’m not a boomer. I think my life is pretty good, actually, and I’m not angry at anybody. Even though I don’t use the fancy degree I earned, had to temp a few times, and once rented a place that was gently falling down around my ears. The big thing was I *didn’t get in debt*. First loan I got in my life was for the car I still have, 11 years later. Second loan was my mortgage. I have always paid off the monthly balance on my credit card. If you don’t buy things you can’t afford it is amazing how much you can save. It also helps to get rid of the idea that anyone “owes” you something just for existing, or even for merely working hard. If you are working hard at something nobody wants, you won’t get paid. Being highly educated is not an entitlement to an income. I’m sorry the French system failed these students and led them to think life was all easy after graduation, but that sympathy evaporates when I see them destroying other people’s property — that, just possibly, someone worked hard to buy.

Mar 30, 2006 - 7:32 pm 48. Brown Line:

Joe,

You are right, things were better for the young 20 years ago than they are now. In 1986, the Reagan tax cuts were taking effect, and the economy was starting a lovely period of serious growth. The value of real estate was still depressed due to the 20%+ interest rates of the Carter years, so it was possible to purchase a decent property for a reasonable price.

My experience somewhat parallels yours. I’m 53; I entered the workforce in 1975, after graduating from college. Inflation was high (remember President Ford’s “WIN” buttons?), and the best job I could get was in the night typing pool for Illinois Bell. Thanks to an aptitude for computers, and more than my fair share of lucky breaks, we’re doing well now; but we had some very lean years, especially when the kids were young (we have five). Even now, we don’t own a car or possess much in the way of luxuries – the habits of frugality are not easily shaken off.

The biggest difference, as you note, is in property values. We bought the house we live in now, in Chicago’s Lincoln Square neighborhood, for $52,000. Back then, ours was a down-at-the-heels ethnic neighborhood. It’s since gotten very hot; a new house just up the street sold the other day for $1.7 million. Quite a change; but here you can’t blame us boomers – it’s the DINKs, traders and lawyers in their late 20s or early 30s, who are bidding real estate up into astronomical heights. People my age or older who don’t make my income are being forced out of the neighborhood by soaring real estate taxes: they are literally being taxed out of their homes.

As for Social Security – well, let’s just say I expect to retire to the cemetery.

Mar 30, 2006 - 8:57 pm 49. philippe:

John Lynch
Over 50% of employment is government or state-owned. These operate in the job-for-life mode. Other companies are operations of non-French companies (HP, Microsoft, IBM, etc.) These companies operate on an amalgam of different laws and policies. Hiring and firing is possible, if somewhat expensive.

Are seriously thinking that the french economy is divided between the public service and foreign compagnies ?
Here’s the list of the companies of the CAC 40 (french dowjones)http://bourse.lesechos.fr/international/international_az.phtml?indice=1rPCAC
Only 3 of them are state owned (EDF – GDF – FranceTelecom. And they can fire people…
There’s NO no-firing clause in french employment contract, but for civil servants !

The post is actualy quite well taken and insightful, but the point of the new law is to make layoffs easier (no need to provide a reason for firing someboby during a 2 years period), not to authorise them. France would not experience such an unemployment rate if the dismissal of employees was forbiden…

Apr 3, 2006 - 7:17 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: