Economic crises, sacrificed youth and poverty

[Christophe]

"France is sacrificing its youth"

The crisis is creating a "traumatized" generation according to the ILO.
Regis Duvignau/Reuters

One in five young people is poor, reveals Secours Catholique in its 2010 annual report published on Tuesday. Its secretary general, Bernard Thibaud, recommends extending the RSA to all young people in the workplace from 18 years of age. Interview.

As every year since 1995, Secours Catholique publishes poverty figures in France on the basis of the situations encountered in its shelters. Assessment of the year 2010: the situation of people in great difficulty deteriorates further for families with children and especially for young people.

What is the 2010 balance sheet?

Last year Secours Catholique encountered 628 situations of poverty, which represents approximately 000 million people, an increase of 1,492% compared to 2,3. What we can see is that poverty is more and more entrenched. 2009% of the people met live below the poverty line, ie 90 euros per month. And the segment of the poorest, the one who lives on only 954 euros per month, continues to grow. There is also an increase in food aid. Because with the surge in constrained expenses, the rest to live is very meager. This is very worrying because the year 550 may be even more difficult for these excluded.

You have, in your study, devote a very special place to young people, why?

First, because very little is said about this segment of the population. Yet one in five young people is poor: a jump of almost 20% in ten years. And the 18-25 age group is in the poorest segment. They bear the brunt of the economic and social crisis. They are more qualified, more qualified than previous generations, but paradoxically they are more precarious. They cumulate all the risks and in spite of an abundance of devices, the State is not very present. Three essential factors push them into poverty. First, the impoverished family, especially since it no longer receives family allowances. Then the accommodation, its access becomes impossible. And of course the job. France sacrifices its youth.

What are your suggestions?

It is imperative to build trust between young people and society. And concretely, it is absolutely necessary to set up an allowance to support the autonomy of young people. But also extend the RSA to all young people in work situation from 18 years old. Family benefits must also be maintained until the age of 20 for the last child attached to the household. And also develop work-linked training in all sectors as a gateway to employment. Not to mention subsidized jobs which seem to be an interesting alternative. As for housing, we must continue the effort to build social housing and allocate a quota of housing to young people.

Source: http://lexpansion.lexpress.fr/economie/ ... 69384.html

I don't know how the poverty line is exactly defined, but € 954 per month seems very high to me !!

Many workers who earn € 1100 spend at least € 150 just to go to work (which makes a budget of € 7 per day worked = transport + lunch) ... so many workers are poor?

Ditto for the small self-employed: all charges and taxes deducted, many touch less than € 954 net net per month (especially in times of crisis like now) !!

Then 954 € by 2 that makes 1900 € per household ... er is it poverty?

[sen-no-sen]

It should rather be said: France sacrifices ... the young, the old, the less old, etc.
The casualization affects all strata of society, and I find that this is particularly abject when it comes to the elderly!

What are your suggestions?

It is imperative to build trust between young people and society.

??

And concretely, it is absolutely necessary to set up an allowance to support the autonomy of young people. But also extend the RSA to all young people in work situation from 18 years old. Family benefits must also be maintained until the age of 20 for the last child attached to the household.

Again and again social assistance ...

[Philippe Schutt]

How many years have we been told of "what is needed"?
I am curious to know what part of the population depends directly or indirectly on the state or on social budgets, including the employees of associations who live off these budgets.

[Ahmed]

The relative poverty line is equal to half of the median income according to Wikipedia.
Social assistance is an emergency in many cases; attacking the consequences of economic and political choices, rather than their causes, they therefore combine low efficiency and sustainability ...
But they are nonetheless necessary, because in addition to the obligation to meet basic needs, this aid can be considered as compensation for damage committed by the community against certain people. his members.

[Philippe Schutt]

here is an interesting idea: the community harms some of its members.

Could you develop?

[sen-no-sen]

Social assistance is an emergency in many cases; attacking the consequences of economic and political choices, rather than their causes, they therefore combine low efficiency and sustainability ...

Emergency for 30 years ...

But they are nonetheless necessary, because in addition to the obligation to meet basic needs, this aid can be considered as compensation for damage committed by the community against certain people. his members.

Social assistance these days aims to buy "peace" ... social (quite relative, many suburbs can switch to insurrection at the slightest problem).
It is also an effective way to keep wages low, artificially compensated by different types of aid, such as RSA ... aid financed by ... debt.

Social housing is a good example of the perverse effect of social assistance, if at the outset the first HLMs were intended to house the poorest and were of an exceptional nature, they have now become commonplace causing a large number of societal problems : delinquency, withdrawal from the community, rising extremes etc ...

[Philippe Schutt]

Well, we can also consider that the error is social assistance itself, which pushes us to rely on it instead of insuring our own livelihood. That it has engendered a scarcity of labor, hence the cost of labor and an influx of profiteers from all walks of life.
And for low-cost housing, they are only one aspect of the state's growing hold on all the elements of life, with the usual inadequacy and mismanagement.

Like what it is only a question of points of view.

[Did67]

Oops, as usual, we leave very quickly on truncated debates:

- any action paid on taxes / levies and contributions is not necessarily null or useless: I invite you to think for 30 seconds about the consequences / cost of a heart attack; roughly speaking, an intervention like the one I underwent costs around € 50; without the pooling of this risk, I would have had to sell my house ...

- same for the school: almost all teachers and trainers in France are paid from public funds (even those from private schools); they are certainly criticized; sometimes open to criticism; but with a ladle, a year of training / school for a child costs an order of magnitude of 5 to 10 € (with huge variations, of course); calculate the cost of training one of your children; 000 children, and it's still a house that leaves!

- therefore do not judge a system by its abuses; I know it's tempting; I even know that this makes the bed of certain extremist parties whose apparent brilliance of the remarks does not hide less a total imbecility at the level of the concepts manipulated ...

- yes, young people, like other "dependent" social categories, drink ... a lot more than we imagine

@ christophe:

- the expenditure is not "proportional"; a household of young people, who would not want to live at the expense of their parents (if they still have any), must find accommodation, food, clothing, heat ... If that is decent, it is an incompressible sum ...

- afterwards, all the "limits" are debatable, the poverty line like others; we can therefore discuss, that's obvious;

- but you have to see the evolution, with the same criterion, even if it is imperfect: there, there is no photo ... The discussion on the limits of the threshold cannot hide the table as well as the discussion on the doubtful aesthetics of the frame of a painting cannot hide the masterpiece (or the crust!) ...

[sen-no-sen]

Oops, as usual, we leave very quickly on truncated debates:

- any action paid on taxes / levies and contributions is not necessarily null or useless: I invite you to think for 30 seconds about the consequences / cost of a heart attack; in the region, an intervention like the one I underwent costs around € 50; without the muatualisation of this risk, I would have had to sell my house ...

- ditto for the school: almost all of the teachers and formatters in France are paid on public fodns (even those of private schools); they are certainly criticized; sometimes open to criticism; but with a ladle, a year of training / school for a child costs an order of magnitude of 5 to 10 € (with huge variations, of course); calculate the cost of training one of your children; 000 children, and it's still a house that leaves!

Do not confuse public service and (pseudo) social policy!
We are not talking about the same thing, education and health are social foundations and are not in any way interested assistantship, because they benefit everyone and participate in the development of our society.

This is not the case with the string of rotten contracts, help with job support (paying a pittance), income from "solidarity", social housing (built by?) which are doing the good job of certain (I aim in particular the top of the pyramid ...).

So under the guise of "solidarity" (they like this term) we participate in the split of a country and its inhabitants, which skilfully allows, as has been the case for a decade, to give pride of place to the policies of struggle. against insecurity, which are only the result (desired?) of this policy.

[Did67]

Do not confuse public service and (pseudo) social policy!

This is not the case with the string of rotten contracts, help with job support (paying a pittance), income from "solidarity", social housing (built by?) which are doing the good job of certain (I aim in particular the top of the pyramid ...) ..

1) That's what I meant.

Because very quickly, we go from one (social) to another (public service), to finally offer to "balance" everything ...

2) Even in social matters, everything is not to be thrown away. I do not wish you to have a disabled child ... I have a friend, full-time employee, divorced, 2 dependent children who has a hard time (that's it, she found) to find accommodation she can pay. She could no longer bear the cost of private rental accommodation alone ... She was very happy to find a social landlord. There are young people with disabilities, the limit of what used to be called debility and which we no longer dare to call. What do we do ? Euthanasia?

My son, his professional baccalaureate in his pocket, experienced a short period of unemployment (thrown in the fall, resumed in the spring) ... I can guarantee you that it was difficult. For him. For us. And I guarantee you that he recovered his morale from the signing of his CDD, today CDI ... He works outside, on construction sites, even when it rains, not always easy ... There are millions like that . Unemployed, but not all lazy.

Etc., etc...

So

1) yes, avoid the slippages (frequent these days) consisting in putting public service in the same bag as the excesses of a social system ...

It is a "fairly" free service (it has not been totally free for a long time!), The cost of which is shared, because it is estimated that cancer is not directly your fault ; that the education of children should not be primarily a burden for parents alone.

More liberal models are quite possible (see the USA). They have advantages. And disadvantages.

2) even in social matters, let us judge with discernment, especially if it is chance not to be concerned! Not everything is rotten, even if there are abuses ...

And watch out for the explosion of misery. Go see in Africa. Even the wealthy behind 8 m walls with barbed wire are not so happy in a hyper-violent society ... when too many people have nothing left to lose.