The Union pour un Mouvement Populaire VS The Parti Socialiste

...

However, to distribute wealth, they have to create it and that when the complications of a socialist system start showing up.

One of the major source of government revenues is taxation. In times of crisis, the PS tend to rise taxes so that low class can benefit as much as possible from these distributions. The problem is rising taxes have some bad effect on the economic growth. By rising taxes, big companies and enterprises are more reluctant concerning hiring new employees because of the additional expenses that this may engender such as social securities, retirement funds, and child benefits. Besides, it is against the third principal of Smith’s Maxim of Taxation. According to the same philosophe, the convenience of payment is very important and an unexpected rise might be inconvenient.[8]

With no job opportunities and less investments, the economy tend to stagnate and an economic recession follows in worst cases, which lead to rise in both price level and unemployment rate.

- Social

- Social expenditures

UMP:

Concerning social expenditures, the UMP’s redistribution of wealth is depending on each worker’s abilities and accomplishment. I other word, if you work more, you deserve more. This promotes the difference between employees based on the efforts and worth of each one. This develop a competitive spirit and a motivation to do better in order to gain more.

However, disparities between social classes can increase as a result of inequality of opportunities. According to Roemer, “equality of opportunities requires compensating individuals with different amounts of resources for their differential abilities, but not for their differential efforts, holding the ability constant”[9]. This create a social injustice because it is impossible to compensate all the inequalities of the citizens. Even by favoring educational facilities, the unbalance will stay and people with large competence and skill but without capitals won’t enter in the competition. Thus, this social issue may favor the rise of robust monopolies that may look for their own interest only.

PS:

Another positive point concerning the socialist party is their strategic redistribution of wealth. The equality of rights is one of their most important principal, so that a pour, as a rich, can have its own chances in life.

However, to distribute wealth, they have to create it and that when the complications of a socialist system start showing up, especially in times of economic crisis.

One example is the promises of Hollande to invest 20 million euro on an international center to promote steel research to prevent the closure of ArcelorMittal, according to BBC. However, given the difficulties that encounter the economy, The President couldn’t keep his promise, disappointing the 629 workers that were waiting for his help on the furnaces.[10]

- Internalities

UMP:

The UMP faces an internal problem of succession. Being a conservative party, there is current divergence of opinions especially in decision making. They will have a primary election in November of next year in order to designate the new presidential concurrent.[11]

PS:

Concerning the socialist party, there have been some complications regarding various members of the party. “Les Frondeurs” are a group of socialist deputies that opposes Francois Hollande because of the decrease in social expenditures and the help presented to great companies. This behavior, according to the “frondeurs”, are against fundamentals concepts and aspirations of the socialist party, which they qualify as being capitalist and anti-social. The new challenge for President Hollande is to gather these members on the same side and avoiding any rivalry between them, which would be very difficult given the depth of opinion divergence. Furthermore, some “frondeurs” affirm that “without sincere changes in politics, the left’s dispersion would be unavoidable”[12]

- Analysis

- Theory

As any other political system in the world, the French political system does have many pitfalls.

In case of continuous problem, a solution might be the creation of a council of “National Union” that contains members of both parties and more. Another solution would more transparency concerning the parties’ decision making and action.

- Demonstration

Concerning the NU council, most relevant disparities will be discussed in order to reach an agreement that satisfies the “ALL”.

However, this cannot work unless all the parties involved to under privilege their principals. Values and Dogmas should be sometimes forgotten for the good of the society. Furthermore, these values were created at a time where the situation of the given country was different. Nowadays, economic and social pressures come up with a totally different situation. To pursue this reasoning, parties should adapt to this new circumstances, by going beyond their principals to find a suitable solution for evolution purposes. According to Henry Bergson: “The necessary condition of evolution is adaptation”.[13]

This will drive opposed members of this “national unity council” to present solid arguments in order for them to be positioned in a common ground.

For example, the socialist party favors social distribution by rising taxes. The UMP favors enterprises by lowering taxes on net revenues. The “National Union” council will agree on a certain tax level in a way that neither investors nor low social classes would be affected. To reach this level, thorough economic research must be conducted. One of the predetermining factors to evaluate are currency, import/export, immigration, production, etc.

Transparency is major problem in a politics. Because any political party would reach some (not mentioning all) the main objectives it declares being able to solve. Making less promises, especially ones that are “unrealistic” is a point to start with. A continuous failure keeping promises make the society lose trust and faith in parties’ abilities and resolutions.

One of the ways to transparency might be more commitment to the cause.

For