Communists, liberals like the others? Reflection on the idea of a "maximum wage".
By
Nicolas Madelenat di Florio
From the Society of Literary History of France.
Research Associate
Centre for Research in Economic Ethics,
Université Paul Cézanne.
To Jean-Yves Naudet, because "they often laugh that can remind man that separates him from the beast"
"Lies, albeit that of silence may seem appropriate, timely and perseverance a lie, but the enemy is too easy, and the truth, albeit painful injury that can heal. "
Andre Gide, Back in the USSR.
title, deliberately provocative, to this note, is entirely voluntary. Indeed, how can we not understand that love of free market that the big communist intellectuals have spread via the website www.salairemaximum.net this wonderful idea of wanting a law establishing a maximum wage. And left more traditional but equally interventionist adding that he would, perhaps, simply, to limit this rule to salaries of top managers of companies where the state owns shares. The Liberals will soon, I hope, understand that this is a very good thing, yet it is not immediately apparent. That is what I'll demonstrate here with a cynicism borne, the same as it is appropriate to address the devotees of the minimum wage, this formidable weapon against the competitive and the integration of young people in the world of work ( among others).
Talking wage in France is a problem. On the one hand because money seems to be draped with a strangely deep taboo, the French loves to show it has many. The current bling even seems to make more and more followers. So good taste, wealth appears, is demonstrated; the devil Culture and the great clock, the modern redneck buys a Rolex because it's a word that reassures his wallet and his ilk. Big shows, big car, big wallet, head full of complacency and hope for a future time where he can learn that the mark, before being one, is a special mechanism. If he tries that place the battery, unfortunately, everything is ruined! The French therefore have a problem with money as much as they love to show solidarity with the causes to which, moreover, they are quite insensitive. The social fabric, however, remains: it pleases the household to pay the homeless (to which it has already passed hundreds of times without seeing it), when a small tear, led by the Police, he was placed in a clinic. And more cynical to say, in summary, we readily bought a soul, or at least awareness, offering generously to any charity an amount calculated carefully so that it does not exceed the deductible portion of taxes. The solidarity formed; is deliciously sad to see how the sharing of wealth is often a grotesque masquerade well.
Masquerade so grotesque, that to win politically. No party is immune, and encourage the stigmatization of a minority is no longer a problem in a country where we can ostracize a religion as being similar to a hypothetical risk of attacks. The fear, after the laughter, is already a regression toward animality. Yet that mocks Do we still dare when members explain that for reasons of social justice (a term very fashionable, as hollow evocative) should regulate the amount of wages. More state, more restrictive laws, it would be more equality between people. It is true, however, and anyone who has any sense will recognize that everything can be compared; from there, take two radically different examples, a beneficiary of the RSA (the famous Revenue de Solidarité Active) and a great boss (take the business in "public" or state participation; it helps to convince the French are means taxes that fund his salary). You will find a terrible gap, the press gets involved, the case is quite deflated Bettencourt, here is a new public hearing as offer major interventionist regimes. The scaffold was already erected, but that prisoners can rest assured they will be entitled to a fair trial before being put to death.
But then, what justifies the title? A very simple analysis. The State has interests in businesses. In sum, the structure that determines the economic playing field has also actors in this same game no need to be a great liberal to understand how unfair it over honest businesses, ie those who simply want to take make profits and grow. And to clarify, in passing, that the leaders of companies where the State is present should not be officers or have a status close, we know too well how the tenure of agents causes a loss of competitiveness and motivation. Adds also framed by a salary, a change in position is, once reached the maximum step, lose interest in his work; man does not a duty to France, he worked primarily for himself. Then, if the salary is capped, which postulates still in positions whose responsibilities and pressure are similar in other societies where income managers are left to the discretion of boards of directors? And that's where the title of this note appears in the light of my will, by capping the salaries of executives of companies with state participation, which distort economic state condemns them to gradually disappear due to lack of competitiveness. The best bosses, most innovative, will be recruited by companies most interesting, the salary is a way to attract and maintain the interest of workers. In sum, coach still work in the middle of the company returned to the state, to find old interventionist habits, sooner or later, lead to a disruption of markets and, ultimately, to the multiplication of crises. We do not give a gun to a child!
0 comments:
Post a Comment