A generationCharming, Emmanuel Macron. On the one hand, the President of the Republic compensated for rising prices through “inflation allowances” that favored the low-income and middle class, and he increased the net minimum wage more significantly than his socialist predecessor, François Hollande; on the other hand, On the one hand, it reduces the tax on capital, thereby reducing the tax on wealth. On the one hand, he abandoned Notre Dame Airport; on the other hand, it faltered in the development of renewable energy. He wants to bring out a kind of “French Islam”, which does not prevent him from promoting Arabic courses in schools.
Some people think that opportunists are “neither right nor left” to others: Did Emmanuel Macron not remind you of the German Chancellor? Angela Merkel is also not categorized-her twists and turns are worthy of a slalom champion.
In order to consolidate purchasing power, the Merkel government will introduce a minimum wage standard that Germany does not know. But under the same push, the Chancellor of the Exchequer will lower the capital tax. Merkel has made great strides in gender equality by setting up 18 months of parental leave to be distributed between the two parents, but she has voted against marriage for all. Before firmly supporting the abandonment of nuclear power, it will firmly oppose it. It will welcome nearly 1 million Syrians in 2015… and it will negotiate a cynical “agreement” with the Turkish President, who now prevents refugees from entering Europe.
If Macron and Merkel pursue a centrist policy that is ready to adjust at any time, then the fundamental difference between the French president and the prime minister is his “marketing”, through the way of promoting his policies.
Historically, Merkel spoke only when necessary.Moreover, when she thought she was obligated to explain her decision, she avoided arguing about the idea; she just mentioned that it was “The wisest decision” or “Good compromise result” Even if there is “There is no real choice”.
On Macron, the important statement prevailed. In order to justify the abolition of the wealth solidarity tax, the head of state rejected the “first rope” theory. When he introduced strict control measures at the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic, the president celebrated that human life is higher than economy. It tends to ideologicalize the most mundane decisions.
This approach poses a triple problem.
You have 59.49% of the articles to read. The rest is for subscribers only.