France is going through a difficult period. A protest movement by high school students has broken out and is meeting with broad support from the population, both teachers' unions and parents. They are protesting against the deterioration of the premises and the non-replacement of their teachers in the event of absence. They are demanding a sharp increase in the resources allocated by the State to national education. At the same time, the government is struggling to get the significant reduction in the budget deficit adopted by the country's growing public debt.

The financial markets, which had long been lenient in demanding a low risk premium when the government issued bonds, abruptly changed their minds at the end of last week, in a context of a general rise in interest rates. The spread with Germany, which had been relatively stable at around 80 basis points since the beginning of the year, suddenly rose to 140 points. And concerns about the situation of the French economy have even been attributed to the slight fall of the euro against the dollar in recent days.

The link was then made between the two crises: young people already affected by the deterioration of the education system and the difficulties in finding a job, and worried, moreover, about the climate change that they would suffer all their lives, would have to repay the debt contracted by previous generations who had largely benefited from the spending. This resentment was aggravated by the refusal of pensioners to give up certain benefits. The debate between generations is not new, but is it based on a fair assessment of reality?

The "Baby Boomers" that many consider to be the profiteers of past years and those responsible for France's financial situation grew up during the Glorious Thirties. Were these years as glorious as they are said to be? What deserves this qualification is the high growth rate of the French economy, a rate that it has never recovered since. But this rate was the result of the very low volume of activity in the aftermath of the war, a volume that was easy to increase rapidly until the oil crises of the 1970s. There is therefore a large part of statistical illusion in the judgment made.

The reality was very different then. Life expectancy was hardly over 65 years. The French had difficulty getting a telephone and there were barely a few hundred kilometers of highways and more than 10,000 deaths on the roads each year. Unemployment, due to the arrival of a new generation on the labor market, was going to explode with a rate exceeding 10% and inflation had reached 14% in 1980.

The thirty years that followed, and which are so often and wrongly criticised, have, on the contrary, brought spectacular and lasting achievements from which current generations benefit and which will be passed on to future generations. Life expectancy, thanks to advances in medical research and the quality of care, has increased by twenty years and the number of deaths on the roads has been divided by five. The French benefit from the best infrastructure network in Europe, including the TGV, connections that allow them to have access not only to the telephone but also to the Internet, and a secure and competitive supply of electricity that contributes very little to greenhouse gas emissions. 

The young generation, known as Generation Z, so dissatisfied today, should become aware of this reality, but it is true that they are also unaware, and certainly cannot even imagine, that in 1980 free radio stations were banned and that there were only three television channels. However, the increase in public debt is a threat and it is imperative to reduce it by adopting reforms based on the reduction of the operating expenses of all administrations and local authorities.

We must also correct three major economic policy mistakes made over the past twenty years. The first concerns the environment. Global warming is a global phenomenon. France has only a tiny share of CO2 emissions but has not taken any action to mitigate its effects, as evidenced by the consequences of this summer's heatwave on the population and on the territories. It is imperative to reduce subsidies for wind turbines and solar panels in favour of investments in the insulation of buildings, and in particular schools, and to install devices to cool the air when necessary.

Secondly, we must return to the policy of reducing charges on low wages. The future of France, and therefore of its industry and its young people, lies in qualified jobs. We cannot have invented Parcours Sup and directed the classes of students each year towards higher education and dissuade companies from recruiting them because we have encouraged them to specialize in services where labor costs less because of these reductions.

Finally, we must completely review family policy and stop discouraging families who can afford to raise their children from having them by freezing family allowances and abolishing tax benefits. This has led to a drop in the birth rate and its concentration in very low-income families who do not always have the means to take sufficient care of their children, which can give rise to violent outbursts and even delinquency.

The increase in public debt is, in part, the result of all these mistakes that have weakened growth, industry and the birth rate. To claim that this will lead to passing on the burden to the next generations makes no sense because nothing will prevent them from continuing to issue securities to repay those that have reached maturity. But these generations will inherit the enormous accumulation of financial assets held by their parents and grandparents and thus the money to repay this debt, in case they decide not to pass it on to their own children. In July 2026, the amount of net financial assets of households had reached €6,300 billion, almost double the public debt.

But taxpayers, whatever their age, must not be the only ones to make efforts. Alongside administrations and local authorities, which must reduce their operating costs, companies, which have largely benefited from the reduction of charges and public investments that give them access to efficient infrastructure and competitive electricity, must take their responsibilities to contribute to the return of the French economy to solid financial balances.

Massive investments abroad, record dividends and share buybacks do not correspond to the objectives that were set when the tax cuts and tax reductions were decided. It is also up to them to ensure that young people have the professional prospects that will enable them to take over from the generations that preceded them. They will then inherit the fruits of the work of their parents and grandparents as well as the tremendous investments that the country has made in recent decades. It is not aware of this today because its horizon is clouded by the financial difficulties of the State, resulting from its mismanagement, but it is a reality.

It will be up to the next governments to make the necessary changes and the youth will then be smiling again.