Preparing for the future of France, and to anticipate the changes of the next few years, this is one of the missions of the State. In the field, the decisions are often far-reaching consequences, and these are often unpredictable.
The State can not stand still, and for several days, France Soir has initiated a series of topics on the effects often harmful to a state intervention both on local communities and on businesses or individuals. So far, it is the role of the State to anticipate future changes and define a course of action. The goal is not easy, and this projection into the future is often the cause of misunderstandings, and even contradictions.
Imagine the future, the consequences of interventionism too strong
To rule is to foresee, and often the State must make decisions that influence the nation for many years or even over several generations. Is not this a deliberate choice on the part of the State, which has led to what is now present under the term of “scandal masks” ?
More generally, isn’t a certain vision of the future of public health in France, which led, in the past, the introduction of numerus Clausus for the medical and paramedical professions ? A decision, which, years after, was presented as the cause of the desertification of medical encountered in some regions of France. In the Face of this new problem, deregulation (evolution of the doctrine of numerus clausus) has been decided urgently by the State, with effects that are visible only in several years ?
By intervening on the evolution of the society, the State exchange equilibria sometimes subtle, resulting in consequences that were previously under-estimated or even ignored.
The decisions of the State, when the general interest sweeps the interest of each
All sectors are affected, and the State is then often forced to make decisions contradicting other choice taken a few years earlier. The eco-trend has influenced the State to give priority to the banning of polluting vehicles in the heart of the big cities. A decision was made to satisfy the ecological requirements of the Citizens. By this choice, the State has led the local shops and businesses in the centre of towns and cities to see their customer base shrink. Is this not the opposite effect than that sought by the various pieces of legislation aimed at reinvigorating the heart of the cities to fight more efficiently against the main commercial areas of the suburbs of the cities ?
The special interests disappear before the general interest, justifying this interventionist approach at every wind of the power of the state. And this may be one of the consequences most harmful government intervention, considered too big ? It has the force of disappoint some categories, the State takes the risk of distorting this ” general interest “, which does just that a minority. Is this not one of the lessons to keep the crisis in the Yellow Vests ? A decision of the state has led the party in silence to the population to take control of the roundabouts to voice their anger. An anger that took the form of a list “à la Prévert” in regards to the claims, a reminder of all these special interests, abandoned for years …