Public and Private Transfers between Generations. Ideological Issues and Perspectives (1): For Sustainable Public Transfers in France

For almost 40 years now, France has been faced with a succession of crises detrimental to its social welfare system. Added to these now are the consequences of an ageing population (on employment and public health, and with regard to dependency etc.) and the limitations imposed by the state’s indebtedness. Governments of right and left have come and gone without really providing any miracle solution. The time has perhaps come, then, to undertake a large-scale revision of the French social system and of the terms of the contract whereby citizens connect with one another and the state. When we take a genuine foresight approach to the examination of this question, one of the key elements is the way both public and private-sector inter-generational transfers are organized. These provide evidence, implicitly or explicitly, of the general orientation of the “social contract”. This is why Futuribles is opening its columns this month to an extensive exercise in thinking about these inter-generational transfers in the form of two articles which present the underlying ideological issues and relevant perspectives. The first of these analyses the modalities by which sustainable public transfers could be made in France, while the second looks at private transfers and possible action to reduce the importance of inherited wealth in French society. In this first article, then, André Masson examines public transfers between generations. He reviews the “ideological triangle” of socio-generational discourses (the “free agent” paradigm, that of “citizen equality” and the “multi-solidarity” model) and the underlying dilemmas for the state. He then goes on to analyse the forms of transfer that would ultimately ensure the solvency of the Welfare state for each of the three paradigms identified: (1) the withdrawal of the state and the promotion of saving and life-annuities if priority is given to the “free agent”; (2) reorientation of the state in favour of youth in the “citizen equality” model; (3) safeguarding the protection of the elderly through a renewed social pact in the “multi-solidarity” vision. However, André Masson also stresses how difficult it will be to undertake any reform in a country as torn as is France between these three prospective paths. Lastly, in an additional section, he goes into greater detail on the subject of possible courses of reform to the pensions system within a multi-solidarity framework (which is sometimes seen as the dominant paradigm in France).