Category Archives: France

Titles for a Flanby Film

Many political episodes resemble a soap-opera, and Mr Hollande’s is no different. One day they will make a film of this – pity Jacques Tati is no longer around. I have been mulling over some possible titles; first, it helps to know some French.

“un flan” is, surprisingly, a flannish sort of tart: wobbly, insubstantial, flabby, floppy, but somewhat fruity: however, nothing you would want to build anything on

“un flanby” is a brand of caramel custard

“flou” is fuzzy, woolly, unclear, indecisive and generally going round in circles

I have tried to feel sorry for Flanby, but have so far failed miserably. I suppose I must be old-fashioned, but a President of France describing marriage as “too bourgeois” is one surreality too far.

  • 24 Heures Avec Un Flanby

  • A La Recherche Du Flanby Perdu

  • A Bird Round The Corner Is Worth One In The Palace

  • Beware of Scooterized Flanbys

  • Fixit with Superflou

  • Flamby Rides Again

  • Flanbied to a Crisp

  • Flanby Goes Too Far

  • Flanby Goes To Hospital (Eventually)

  • Flanby Loses Count

  • Flanby Overdoes It

  • Flanby Breaks His Pact

  • Flanby Through The Back Door

  • Flanby By Night

  • Flanby On Top

  • Flanby In Disguise

  • Flanby Goes Undercover

  • Flanby Does It With A Wheelie

  • Flanby Poules the other one

  • Flanby Loses His Helmet

  • Flanby Does It Round The Corner

  • Flanby Keeps It Up!

  • Flanby My Dear, I Don’t Give A Damn

  • Flanby The Hard Man

  • Flanby And The (Not So) Secret Service

  • Flanby Today, Goon Tomorrow

  • Flanby Reporting, Present and Incorrect

  • Flanby Reveals All (but not to us)

  • Flanby Undone

  • Flanby Strikes Again

  • Flouby’s Cast-Offs

  • Flouflanby’s Rejects

  • Goodnight Flanby

  • Hell hath no fury Like A Woman Flanbied

  • How to Flanby For Dummies

  • Invasion of the Flanby

  • Je ne regrette pas mon Flanby

  • La Flambée du Flanby

  • Last Tango With Flanby

  • Last Tango in Paris With A Scooterized Flanby

  • Le Lys Dans L’Allée

  • Les Trois Victimes de Flouflanby

  • Mama! The Flanby is sagging!

  • Moi? Flanby?

  • Mon Manege a Trois

  • Mr Flou et Les Trois Flanbybabes

  • My Flanby in Shining Helmet

  • Never Trust a Flanby

  • Once Flanbied, twice shy

  • Once a Flanby, Always a Flanby

  • Only I Can Flanby

  • Pass Me The Suicide Pills; here Comes Flanby

  • Revenge of the Flanbied

  • Scooter Flanby, Roi du Flou

  • Showdown at the Palace

  • Six Jours Sans Flanby

  • SuperFlanby and the Last One Standing

  • SuperFlanby et les Trois Flanbieds

  • That’s Another Fine Flanby You’ve Got Me Into

  • The Flanby is undone!

  • The Flanby on Wheels

  • The Flanby Your Mother Warned You About

  • The Flanby Has A Pact with Irresponsibility

  • The Third Lady of Flanby

  • The Flanby Trio

  • The Three Flanbieds

  • There’s No Stopping A Flanby

  • There’s a Flanby in my bed!

  • Three Flou Into The Flanby’s Nest

  • Too much Flanby is Bad For Your Health

  • Two Down, One To Go

  • You can’t keep a Flanby Down

Leave a comment

Posted by on January 22, 2014 in France, Humour, Politics


Tags: , ,

Surrealism is Alive and Well in France

Another very excellent article from Roger Bootle in “The Daily Telegraph” today.

On the face of it, he announced at last a seismic change of direction which involves reducing these three apparent evils:

– the size of the state
– taxation
– the cost and complexity of employing anyone and therefore
– unemployment

WONDERFUL! one might say. Hollande – the archetypal socialist – at LAST comes out with a programme worthy of Mrs Thatcher. And yet ………. an experienced France-watcher is forced to repeat the time-honoured phrase. “Zee proof eez in zee pudding.” WHERE will he find the FIFTY BILLION EUROS of cuts in government spending? Most of this is wrapped up in state employment, so how many of his own supporters is he going to make redundant? Which bits of the French state apparatus is he going to amputate and toss into the furnace of history? On this, there is a deafening silence.

Sadly, as in the UK, there are plenty of morons in France who think that economic problems are always someone else’s fault, in particular, “the rich” – hence the 75% tax rate which has inspired thousands of well-off French people to flee their country, often for the economic freedom of London, which now has a population of 400,000 French.

Back in France, the lunacy of all this will take some time to sink in, but once all the rich have all left or been taxed out of existence, then just the poor and poorer will remain, only even poorer and poorer. At that point the French mob will revolt and guillotine those responsible – and if they can’t find those responsible (their having escaped to Switzerland) they will guillotine someone else.

This is called “socialisme a la francaise”. It is a system that has its admirers, principally Ed “My Dad was a Marxist and I’m proud of it” Milliband.

Francois Hollande is truly amazing, quite apart from the fact that marriage is apparently too “bourgeois” for him to indulge in it himself. His country is in a death spiral and so he announces – after a delay of 18 months while he was thinking about it – reforms worthy of Thatcher – and indeed those arch-socialist role-models Francois Mitterrand and Gerhard Schröder. However, the evil, loathsome, capitalist sector (which just happens by pure coincidence to be the wealth-creating bit of society) is supposed to create loads of jobs NOW, and yet the govt side of the “responsibility pact” won’t deliver cuts to employers until 2017. (Thanks for this bit of data, Roger Bootle). When the employers can’t employ any more people as they are too busy with the paperwork involved in going bankrupt, they will naturally be labelled “irresponsible”.

This really is “Alice in Wonderland” stuff. It is of course, perfectly logical for French socialists, since the problems are all the fault of employers for not employing enough people. There is a certain logic in this:

  • Not enough jobs?
  • Simples – employers are not employing enough people.
  • ERGO -> it’s employers’ fault.

We’ve seen this sort of logic before in the 35 hour week, which went something like this:

  • There are too many unemployed.
  • We will make those employed work less so that
  • Employers will have to employ more people to do the work required.

This hilariously-surreal reasoning is based on the theory that there is an immutable x amount of work to be done, which should therefore be shared out by all those capable of working.

Surprisingly for the highly-diplomaed ENA graduates of the political elite, this cunning plan did not actually reduce employment much at all. This was of course hardly surprising to everyone else, since it was a plan so cunning that Baldrick himself would have rejected it as insane. Still, rather than admit they were wrong, the French elite pressed on with it with gritted teeth and determination; even Sarkozy could not bring himself to abolish it at a stroke, which would have been the sane thing to do.

“It hasn’t had long enough to work its way through the economy,” said my French friends.

However, as I pointed out to them at the time, we dastardly Anglo-Saxons would look at this from another logical viewpoint:

  • Forcing people to work fewer hour creates more jobs (according to you)
  • The number of hours people are allowed to work is clearly in inverse proportion to the jobs that will be created.
  • We therefore propose legally limiting the number of hours people can work to ONE per week.
  • This will obviously create absolutely teeming millions of jobs.

My friends looked at me sadly and smiled: “British humour ….”

I was in fact serious – a dose of Reduction ad Absurdum being sometimes required to make a point – but they just didn’t get it – and still don’t. I was as it happens working in France when all this lunacy was put in place, and I remember very well listening to someone from the local Chamber of Commerce coming to explain it to our workforce of 6 people. We sat there for an hour until my head was spinning with numbers of hours worked, holidays taken off and/or added, cumulative minutes here and there, what happened about “overtime” and so on, until I could take it no more and asked:

“Yes, but how does this actually affect ME in practical terms.”

Whereupon this bod said. Ah, this doesn’t affect YOU at all since you are a  ‘cadre’, (executive) and they   have a completely different status.” (Everyone MUST have a “status” in France.)

“Well, what am I doing here, then? I do actually have work to do …..” I riposted.

“But you do need to know how the new law works,” was the reply.

Naturally, I wanted to ask WHY I needed to know I (I had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with employing or paying anyone myself) but decided that life was too short and rapidly getting shorter, and so I excused myself and left.

So, from then on the French worked fewer hours but – as far as I remember – without losing any money (THAT would not have gone down well, even with the faithful socialist sheeple), while the rest of the world – and the ant-like labouring Asians in particular – looked on in astonishment and with no little hilarity. “Have the French discovered the equivalent of perpetual motion in employment practice?” was the cry that rang out all around the world.

Well, unfortunately, “No, they hadn’t.”, though it made the new law’s inventors quite famous for a while, except that fame in these matters does have a habit of mutating into notoriety in the face of reality: Russian communism being just another example.

This was all about ten years ago, but nothing much has changed in French logic. Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.” Still, once the French political elite has reduced France to an economic wasteland, it will be so cheap to go there on holiday that millions will pour in from booming Anglo-Saxonia, Scandinavia, Asia and elsewhere to boost the economy, while at least there is the lush farmland to ensure nobody starves, even if half the French population will have to return there to find anything useful to do at all.

Eventually, we will have reached the Socialist Nirvana of 100% taxation and 0% tax revenue – or maybe Hollande will work a miracle?



Tags: , , ,

Les Fourberies du Président


Oh dear – another fine mess I’ve got myself into.

Like many others, I have been following the latest sex-scandal afflicting French President Francois Hollande. I say “latest” because his so-called private life has been pretty colourful and given plenty of ammunition to the French media in the past – as indeed did the goings-on of Nicolas Sarkozy before him.

Is my interest in this purely voyeurism? Are the philanderings of the French President my concern? The French establishment would have us believe “Non”: “everyone has a right to a private life,” they bleat.

Well, yes, up to a point …. As it happens, now living in Germany, I worked in France for ten years and still have a house there which we haven’t managed to sell yet. I also get a modest pension from France from my work for the local Chamber of Commerce. I am therefore a French taxpayer, which is not a role for the faint-hearted. As such I therefore contribute to the remuneration of the President of France and thus feel I have some entitlement to know how my taxes are spent, and indeed what sort of person the President is, he having been put in charge of my money.

Well, having decided that up to a point his personality, character and conduct ARE my business – and also that a President cannot be judged in quite the same way as a private citizen – I decided to establish a few facts from which I could draw conclusions – which would no doubt be different from those someone else might draw.

What then are the facts?
  • Francois Hollande had four children with his partner of 30 years, Mme Ségolène Royale, but they never married.
  • In 2007, he left Mme Royale for another woman, journalist Mme Valérie Trierweiler.
  • When Mr Hollande became President, Mme Trierweiler moved with him into the Elysée Palace in Paris, the official home of the French President. She was generally referred to as as “the First Lady of France”, even though of course they were not married.
  • It was reported that she has five personal servants and access to presidential transport such as planes and cars. The cost of this, of course, is borne by the French taxpayer.
  • Last week the magazine “Closer” ran a story alleging that Mr Hollande was having an affair with an actress 20 years his junior, Mlle Julie Gayet. Rumours of this liaison had in fact been circulating for some months in the corridors of power – and in various press-rooms and bars, no doubt – but this was the first time the affair had been publicized.
  • Mr Holland complained about “this invasion of my privacy” and threatened to sue the magazine, though without denying the story. The 7 pages of “revelations” and photos included some of the President apparently trying to disguise  himself by wearing a crash-helmet as he entered the building where Mme Gayet lives.
  • It seems that the President travelled to Ms Gayet’s dwelling (which is very near to the Elysée) on a scooter accompanied by a single bodyguard, who rather quaintly is alleged to have been charged with getting croissants in the morning.
  • It is not clear at this point whether Partner N° 2 (Trierweiler) knew about partner N° 3 (Gayet) before the article broke last week, but as we go to press it is reported that Ms Teierweiler has been hospitalised – apparently for treatment for  “exhaustion”.
  • It is also not clear whether she still resides at the Elysée Palace or indeed whether she and the President are still “an item”. If she IS, then it would seem that Mr Hollande has two items on the go simultaneously – assuming that he still has Mme Gayet in tow (it’s a fast-moving scenario).

OK – these are the facts as far as I know. The question is, is all this anyone else’s business? I have thought about this a bit, and come to the conclusion that it is.

  1. Firstly, he is the President of a nuclear-armed country which is in a complete financial, economic and social shambles. Has he really got time to spend philandering with two women? “He needs a lot of relaxation for his extreme stress.” Well, yes – power does seem to stimulate the carnal juices rather, but even so …… managing two women at once is usually fairly fraught.Is it not selfish in the extreme to have put Mme Trierweiler in this humiliating position? Would not common decency have required that he end his relationship with her – and presumably boot her out of the Elysée Palace – before embarking on yet another liaison?
  2. Or is the media entirely to blame for this? Can a President do what he likes with whom he likes, where, when and as often as he likes? Many French people think so: others maybe not: there are limits to everything.
  3. “None of our business”? Well, I am helping to pay for all this, including Mme Trierweiler’s five members of staff and all the rest. Moreover, I am not sure I want someone as President who displays what I would consider a lack of common, human and personal decency.
  4. And of course there is the marriage aspect. It is generally accepted that marriage is a “good thing” for society, yet Mr Hollande shies away from it, in the first instance for 30 years while having four children. His position on marriage is weird. What sort of message does this behaviour give to the people of France about the institution of marriage? What has Mr Hollande got against marriage, which is a personal commitment? his is not a very good example to set.
  5. Mr Hollande is not a private citizen; for better or worse higher standards of behaviour and morality are expected and demanded of a national leader than those displayed by Mr Hollande.
  6. No, I am not personally interested in tabloid muck-raking in general, but when it comes to the President of France I am prepared to make an exception. And in any case, the President was only too willing to show off Mme Trierweiler to the world and house her at public expense in the Elysée Palace, so he can surely not have it both ways: use her for his image on the one hand but then claim he has a right to hide anything negative on the other. Or can he?
  7. Was it really safe to go wandering off on a scooter with just one bodyguard? Suppose he had been kidnapped by Al Qaeda? No, he didn’t have far to go, but even so ….

My bottom-line is that he is a selfish cad. And to be honest, I would rather not be led by such people.

The story no doubt has more mileage in it, particular as far as Mme Trierweiler is concerned. One has for her a great deal of sympathy, as indeed for Mme Royale, who never achieved marriageworthy status with Mr Hollande even though she gave him four children.

And of course, we cannot UNKNOW about the story. I didn’t publish it, but I couldn’t help reading about it, could I? So SHOULD publication of the truth be banned? I am not generally in favour of banning the truth, even if it is “private”. But IS it “private” if it concerns the President of France?

As is clear, there are a number of questions this affair throws up, not the least being why these French politicians are so over-sexed. Is it something in the diet?

None of the above of course is relevant to his stewardship of France, even though that is surreally incompetent and clueless – a story we can safely leave to another day.



The IMF is pontificating again. Apparently debt is now so bad that governments are going to have to develop sophisticated “instruments” to – in effect – inflate away, confiscate and/or force us to spend our money. (See Cyprus – “haircut” history)

“The (IMF) paper says the Western debt burden is now so big that rich states will need same tonic of debt haircuts, higher inflation and financial repression – defined as an “opaque tax on savers” – as used in countless IMF rescues for emerging markets.”

I like the reference to “rich countries”. Can a country which is vastly indebted still be considered as “rich”? Am I supposed to consider as rich my mate down the road who has vast debt and yet STILL continually spends way more than his income just because his house is stuffed full with electronic gadgets and he somehow manages to run a posh car?

In layman’s terms, this all seems to amount to a “savings tax” – the confiscation of money legally and frugally acquired but not spent. Please correct me if I am wrong. This must surely be the ultimate in Big Brother lunacy. We ALREADY pay LOTS of tax on what we earn and then we are to be taxed again if we choose to be frugal and careful and save some of what’s left. This really IS in the category of “You could not make it up.” What’s next; a 100% tax and the government spending it FOR us?

And all this financial chaos is NOT OUR FAULT; government over-spending is to blame. The PLEBS did not rack up this insane debt; GOVERNMENTS did. The concept of “living within one’s means” just does not seem to enter into it.

None of these people that we elect have the guts to say to their people: “Sorry, we can’t afford that.” Instead, they spend vast sums they do not have to effectively BRIBE voters with their own money to vote for them. I say “their own money”, but most of it is of course BORROWED.

Yup, the current situation is caused by GOVERNMENTS: people we ELECT and PAY to LEAD US. But I did not ask Gordon Brown to rack up vast debt; I did not ask the Coalition to CONTINUE to INCREASE debt. I elected them to do what is necessary to reduce it, because – bleedin’ obviously – too much debt is very BAD. I know that; all my mates down the pub know that; my 90-year-old Gran knows that, but Europe’s  politicians apparently do NOT.  Or if they do, they do not CARE. In extreme cases, having got their own countries into extreme debt (France) they want some OTHER country (Germany) to bail them out.

I have a theory that Homo Sapiens is basically unhinged when it comes to collective actions affecting the long-term. Can someone convince me it’s not true?

However, it is important to try to read between the lines. All this twaddle (beautifully wrapped up in posh economists’ psychobabble) is from the IMF, an organisation run by French political-crony Christine Lagarde. Having totally failed as French Finance Minister to put a brake on her own country’s lunatic spending she was put in charge of the IMF to tell other people how it should be done.  You might think this to be worth yet ANOTHER “You could not make it up” award. And of course, her secret agenda is to find a way to bail out France so it can continue with its “French model” of high state spending, taxes and general interference and insane regulation. That’s what this is about ……

So, I have seen through your little game, Ms Lagarde ….. and stealing our savings will NOT help you to the French Presidency …… your plebs are going to have something to say about that. Please do something useful: retire and go and plant potatoes and trees: the former to feed us and the latter to save us from Global Warming.

OH, some of the debt crisis might be eased if you would pay tax on your OWN vast salary ……..


Tags: , , , , ,

Lettre à mon Député (encore)

Monsieur Urvoas

Alors, cela continue ……. rien que des impôts et l’attente désespéré de la croissance ……. Faisons le bilan ….

IMPÔTS: maintenant QUATRE-VINGT-SEPT taxes nouvelles ou augmentées depuis votre arrivée au pouvoir. Merci. “Croissance”? On n’a plus rien à dépenser.

La taxe sur l’épargne est imposée à 15,5% RETROSPECTIVEMENT à 1997. Magnifique, tout comme la taxe des plus valus sur sa maison principale et la période d’exonération doublée de 15 à 30 ans. MERCI.

L’élite politique de gauche souhaiterait imposer ENCORE des impôts, comme si le médicament principal des dernières décennies avait été correct mais insuffisante! SURRÉEL!

CRÉATION DE L’ARGENT: Vous détestez les entrepreneurs. Un exemple:

“J’ai créé une entreprise il y a sept ans. Si je le vends maintenant, je vais devoir payer au gouvernement 60% de la valeur que j’ai créée.”

Votre président a dit: “Je déteste les riches.” Expliquez-nous comment vous allez avoir une économie réussie sans créer des riches. Alors, tous ceux qui créent de l’argent seront punis? Magnifique.

LES ENTREPRISES: Complexité et coût ridicules pour lancer et pour fermer une entreprise, comme si ceux qui créent l’argent étaient des voyous. Complexité et coût ridicules pour embaucher ou virer des employés: 3,200 de pages dans le Code du Travail (70 en Suisse).

ÉCONOMIE: la part globale des exports de la France est tombée de 7% en 1999 à 3% aujourd’hui. Sa part des exports de l’UE est tombée de 17% à 12%. L’ Italie fait mieux maintenant. La dette ne cesse d’accroître.

L’OECD: “La France est sur-réglementée dans presque tous les domaines.” Exacte …

DÉSESPOIR: Ceux qui se sauvent vers l’étranger de cette folie (les plus ambitieux, les plus productifs, les jeunes – et Depardieu, évidemment) en 2012 = 40,000 – on prédit 60,000 pour 2013.

MÉDIAS: Vos médias “officiels”? Aucune objectivité – un tsunami d’information progouvernemental. On accuse ceux qui protestent contre cette folie d’être de “mauvais citoyens”.

PHILOSOPHIE: Vous restez dominés par “la gauche”, et une foi résiduelle dans le marxisme, un échec catastrophique partout au monde. Vous êtes détachés des réalités économiques: vous niez les évidences: vous enchaînez les entrepreneurs au lieu de les libérer.

VOTRE PRÉSIDENT n’a guère voyagé, ne parle aucune autre langue et n’a jamais travaillé dans un poste où il devait créer de l’argent. Il ne connaît ni comprend le secteur privé, le SEUL qui crée de l’argent que vous dépensez.

MENSONGES: Dans l’élection vous avez sauvagement critiqué Sarkozy pour vouloir imposer “l’austerité”, mais une fois élu, vous avez fait EXACTEMENT PAREIL, sinon PLUS.

LE FUTUR: Le FN ne peut que devenir plus populaire si vous ne changez pas radicalement – ce dont vous paraissez incapables. Mme Le Pen est – de toute évidence – beaucoup plus dangereuse que son père.

CONCLUSION: Vous n’êtes plus le parti “du peuple”, mais le parti d’une philosophie démodée et destructrice, du chômage, du gigantisme de l’état, de la réglementation, des impôts, du conservatisme (on ne change rien – exception faite de l’augmentation des impôts), des acquis (chauffeurs de taxi, notaires, pharmaciens, politiciens, chefs des universités, dirigeants de l’ENA etc). Vos prédecesseurs étaient pareils. Quand Mr Chirac est arrivé, il a promis des changements: L’ENA, les retraites etc, mais RIEN N’A ÉTÉ FAIT. Il n’y a JAMAIS de réelles restructurations intelligentes. L’état ne cesse de s’aggrandir.

  • réduisez la taille de l’état

  • réduisez les impots

  • abolissez le Code du Travail et faites comme la Suisse avec 70 pages au lieu de 3,200

  • abolissez les acquis

Je vous écris parce que j’aime la France, mais vous êtes en train de la ruiner.

Leave a comment

Posted by on October 29, 2013 in European Union, France


Tags: , , ,

Lettre à mon Député ….

Mr Urvoas                                                                               6 septembre, 2013

Je viens de recevoir mon avis d’imposition pour 2012. J’aimerais savoir pourquoi avant de quitter la France je ne payais pas la CSG mais que maintenant il semble que je paie 665€ de prélèvements sociaux.

Je n’habite pas en France, mais on garde la maison là, et je paie l’impôt sur le revenu pour mes locataires-étudiants. Tout d’un coup, vous m’exigez 665€ de PLUS. En plus de cela, vous avez augmenté l’impôt sur ce revenu de location et vous avez AUSSI doublé la période d’exonération sur la vente d’une maison principale de la taxe des plus-valus de 15 à 30 ans.

Vous n’avez pas honte de punir les innocents comme cela, des innocents qui ne peuvent pas se défendre? Le pays est très endetté, oui, mais je suis INNOCENT. C’est VOUS, l’élite politique française, qui depuis 1974 N’A PAS PRÉSENTÉ UN BUDGET ÉQUILIBRÉ.

C’est-à-dire, c’est VOUS qui dépensez plus que vos revenus depuis près de quarante ans. NOUS N’Y SOMMES POUR RIEN. Pour moi, vous entrez dans le zone de vol légalisé de mon argent. Tout ce que vous savez faire, c’est augmenter les impôts. Comment voulez-vous après que les gens aient de quoi dépenser pour lancer la fameuse “croissance”?

L’année dernière, vous m’avez dit que vous ne partagiez pas mon analyse de la situation globale. Je me demande si vous commencez à changer d’avis? Il faut noter les faits incontestables suivants:

  • La France entre dans son 27ième mois consécutif d’augmentation du chômage, qui serait même pire si des dizaines de milliers de jeunes gens n’abandonnaient pas leur pays en désespoir.

  • La compétitivité en France reste ce qu’elle est depuis longtemps, loin inférieure à l’Allemagne, surtout à cause du coût catastrophique de l’embauche.

  • Le pays est parmi le plus taxé du monde.

  • L’état consomme près de 60% du PIB – parmi les plus élevés d’Europe.

  • Le coût et la complexité de l’embauche sont effarants: plus de 3,650 pages dans le Code du Travail alors que la Suisse en a 70.

Vous ne faites pratiquement RIEN pour corriger tout cela; au contraire, les impôts ne cessent de monter. C’est une catastrophe et une trahison du peuple. C’est VOUS, l’élite, qui organise les finances et les dépenses; vous ne pouvez pas arrêter de nous victimiser?  Baissez la taille de l’état et donc le coût pour le contribuable. Un exemple: abolissez la Médecine du Travail. Aucun autre état européen n’utilise ce système beau mais impayable, comme beaucoup d’autres éléments de l’état.

Où vous nous amenez? L’Europe refuse la “shale-fracking”, et le prix du gaz est actuellement au moins TROIS FOIS ce qu’il est aux États-Unis. Vous êtes tous fous? Et svp arrêtez de nous dire que “La crise est finie.” Elle n’a pratiquement pas commencé.

Votre contribuable                                                   Chris SNUGGS

Leave a comment

Posted by on September 8, 2013 in Angry Letters, France, Politics


Tags: ,

I weep for France (and my bank balance)

What is on my mind?

The loathsome, incompetent, crapulous, idiotic French political elite, which ONLY knows how to raise taxes while proclaiming almost each day that “croissance” will save France.

We are now in the TWENTY-SEVENTH straight month of increased unemployment, and the figures would be far worse but for the thousands of young people (and Gerard Depardieu) leaving France like rats a sinking ship.

I am extremely angry because the French state, which is ENTIRELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEBT and other problems has:

  • … DOUBLED overnight the period of exoneration on Capital Gains Tax (Taxes des Plus-Valus) on the sale of one’s principal residence from 15 to 30 years
  • … INCREASED the tax I pay on the pathetic income I receive from renting our house while we are in Germany
  • IMPOSED the CGS (UP in my case from 450€ three years ago to EIGHT HUNDRED EUROS NOW) on non-residents, who used to be exempt.


As I said, they are crapulous, loathsome, hypocritical and utterly incompetent, but their incompetence is impoverishing the rest of us – though not THEM of course.

  • The size of the state must be reduced. (among the biggest in the free world)
  • Taxes must be reduced. (among the highest in the world)
  • Employment must be simplified and its costs reduced. (3,650 pages in the Code du Travail compared to 70 in hardly-failing Switzerland).

They are doing almost NONE of this, and in the case of taxes, the OPPOSITE.

It is absolutely unbelievable, and how the French people have put up with this utter nonsense from BOTH major parties for so long is a total mystery.

Leave a comment

Posted by on September 6, 2013 in Business & the Economy, France, Politics


Tags: , ,