http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17975660 Official now. I don't exactly support him, but given the suicidal policies of the Merkel/Sarkozy axis, ECB et al, his promise to shake things up a bit could be just what Europe needs if he follows though. You simply can't have all members of a currency union running a trade surplus at once, as the Germans would have it.
Isn't he the one that wants to put a 75% income tax on the wealthy? That should certainly be interesting to watch. As will his increased social spending.
Sarkozy tamed the behemoth welfare state in necessary ways (the government accounts for 56% of GDP), was instrumental in keeping the Eurozone from falling apart, but the French hate him because he's an elitist prick. I guess Bill O'Reilly will resume the boycott on France.
I think that's a very accurate assessment. Unfortunately if Hollande implements his policies, the Eurozone is going down the toilet.
The idea that the policies pursued by Sarkozy and his allies have helped the Eurozone is ignorant at best.
I worry for our British brethren. They are about to be descended upon by the filth that is the French. Worse, it will be rich French. The arrogance will be overwhelming.
Who gives a shit. Canadian government said they're not putting money into the IMF fund to help bail out those wankers. The US on the other hand has said they will pony up cash. Sucks to be you guys. Using your taxpayer money to bail out people who think they should be able to retire at 60.
Despite Rick's claims, those running mammoth deficits (see: USA) are still having major problems from the financial crisis, while Germany (promoting strong fiscal responsibility) is doing fairly well economocially. Merkel's policies have worked. Hollande has almost zero government experience. He wants to put in place a 75% income tax on major fortunes. He is widely viewed, even by the socialists, as "weak." IOW, he very likely won't be much of a president, while Sarkozy, for all the things people complained about (usually more about his personality than his policies, which was enough to lose him the election -- French politics have unfortunately moved a bit in the direction of American politics in the last 20 years), was respected internationally. Hollande probably will not be able to stand up to Merkel and the influence of Germany in post-Sarkozy Europe will probably be greatly increased. This election won't actually make much of a difference, however, unless the socialists win the legislative elections in June. And if Sarkozy had been re-elected, that wouldn't have made any difference, if the right does not win the legislative elections in June. In the French structure, the prime minister is the head of government, not the president. When the president has a parliamentary majority, he is the de facto head of government and changes prime ministers whenever they don't do his bidding. But when they are on opposite sides, the president isn't supposed to even express his opinion on political matters, and he has basically no influence on what is done. The prime minister runs the country the way he wants. So the real news will be in June. It has never happened that a newly elected president did not fail to obtain a parliamentary majority, but since Hollande's policies are not actually all that popular, it is possible. The next couple of months could be very interesting.
It will be interesting to see which policies he changes and which he does not. It will also be interesting to see what Germany's reaction is to his proposed changes.
Hollande's first setback will be Germany's refulsal to re-negotiate the austerity treaty. A large part of Sarkozy's power came from the fact that he was following Merkel's lead. If Hollande leaves the path of fiscal austerity, the result will not be a new European fiascal policy. Instead, Germany's dominating role in European politics will be strengthened once again. The Germans are too firmly committed to their goals to let a French socialist get in their way.
Asyncritus - Debts and deficits were not the cause of the problem in Euirope in any country other than Greece. If you look back before the crash, many of the countries now in difficulty were running surpluses and had low levels of debt. "Fiscal responsibility" did not save them, and imposing it is the answer to the wrong question. Germany is doing well now because they are the biggest economy in Europe and as such, the monetary policy of the ECB (particularly with regards to interest rates) is being employed to suit them. That means that weaker economies in recession are left with a currency that is much too strong for them.They can't compete so they're left with massive unemployment and no growth. That can't continue, and telling them to balance their books won't fix it. I won't speak to Hollande's policies internal to France since I don't know enough about it, but on a European level there is some hope that he might alter the failed austerity policies. The US incidentally, is doing much better than Europe right now. Oh, and what happens when the dust settles in Greece over the coming days will be interesting too. I hear that the establishment parties are being decimated.
I agree to some extent (though not completely) after all Spain was actually running a surplus before it got hit by speculators. That said, Europe did have a low rate of economic growth and a fairly high rate of long term debt increase (mostly due to pension and health care costs rising as the population ages). That was a long term problem which needed to be addressed but the Greek crisis (who was the least responsible and least sustainable) has caused difficulties even for moderately responsible countries like Spain.
This is precisely true. And frankly, I don't think our government is making a great effort to hide the fact that they know it. Having said that, France has just gone from a right-wing populist to a left-wing populist President. This might be progressive, but progress it isn't.
Only if they are of the same party. The French system is kinda wacky in that regard. In many if not most ways their Executive Branch is more powerful than in America. However it is a split executive, with both a (non-figurehead) President and a PM. When the same party controls both the Presidency and the National Assembly, the French President picks (controls) the PM and it could be argued that he/she is the most powerful executive in the developed world. However when another Party has the Majority, they pick the PM and the President is pretty much relegated to external affairs. That and the stacking of political offices (say for instance you might be Mayor of your town, on the County Council, the State Treasurer AND a US Senator) were the weirder aspects of their system that I can recall.
Britain's next. The failure of austerity is so clear now, it's being rejected everywhere in Europe as the totally counterproductive policy it has proven to be. It's just plunged the UK into a double dip recession, meaning Cameron's days are numbered. Let's hope we don't make the same mistake--going back to Bush policies means going back to Bush-era decline, and the Romney platform plus the Ryan budget equals a pullback which is SO drastic it could rival 1932.
No, this is the result of Euro's being spoiled for years with unsustainable social spending. Much like an alcoholic they're having a hard time breaking the addiction. Also much like an alcoholic, the result of not breaking it is very bad.
Amazing. Austerity hasn't worked so the recipe is MORE AUSTERITY!!! This is going to shake out with Greece and possibly Spain dumping the Euro. Having so many countries on the same currency looked like a great idea on paper, but I think we all know that "one size fits all" is a damn lie.
I didn't say that. The fact is that austerity at some level is what's needed. The reason it meets so much resistance is a society that is addicted to the govt being their mommy. Going back to more socialized spending is not the answer, and the world markets are showing it. People rioting because they're no longer getting ridiculous benefits does not mean that austerity is not the economically viable answer. A balance must be found.