I think the facts of France’s economy speak for themselves. I have hired (and tried to fire – we had to offer two YEARS severance to management, and this was when my company at the time – Lineo – was struggling through layoffs. We could fire everyone in the company outside France – HAD TO, in fact, because we were about to go bankrupt – while our French office refused to make any sacrifices and demanded that we further bankrupt the company by paying out massive severances. We eventually went out of business and the French employees finally got the same thing the rest of us got: rien (nothing). Would I ever hire there again? Never.

So please don’t talk about how the law simply made it impossible to fire without a good reason – I’ve employed people there. It’s hard to fire anyone for any reason in France. As a result, most companies simply don’t hire there at all. Who needs the bother?

It’s nice to have safety nets. But I want people who are more concerned with upside than mitigating downside. You don’t build a successful company with the latter.

By the way, is design for this blog made by you? I swear I saw the same design on G160 website a few months ago, but they seems to have different layout now. Don’t understand me wrong, I’m not blaming, I’m just interested.

P.S. – You haven’t spent much time in the U.S., have you? Your view of life here is pretty warped.

-ian

Think about it this way. Who is more likely to feel the need of digesting unhealthy food in order to get a little bit of satisfaction out of it: the man who can live a happy life without constant fear of losing his job and having enough free time to do what he really loves; or the man who is forced to work all day just to keep his job, always in fear of losing it?

Who is more likely to spend most of his free time in front of the TV (and in the long run, becoming dumber and dumber), trying to get a little bit of distance from his daily life: the man whose daily life is relaxed and without fear; or the man whose daily life consists of two or three jobs that he has to work hard to prevent losing?

Who is more likely to be a good family father: the man who is protected from abuse by his employer; or the man who must do everything the employer wishes, however humiliating, always building up anger that has to be set free (probably at home, since he does not want to risk losing his job)?

Please think about it for a while. Thanks.

(I’m not claiming that Europe is heaven, by the way. We’re becoming more and more American now, with the EU and all, which I find horrible. But either way, equalling capitalism with »good« and socialism with »evil« is just as dumb as doing the opposite. Prove that either makes for a better *life* and I’ll take it over the other.)