쉐도잉 연습: Retraites : un expert de la finance explique le sujet à deux citoyens. - 영상으로 영어 말하기 배우기

You want to use your private private income to finance a city in Spain, finance your retraite, go to the moon, go to a vacation.

You're talking about ultra-richs?

The conclusion I'm the most likely to do is a baisse of the 30% of the retirement rate around 2035-2040.

8% of the French understand the system of the retirement.

The retirement rate by capitalization, each one for his own.

The public system is not in faillite.

You're not trying to make a lot of people for a while.

If we solve the problem of the retirement, we solve everything.

Faux.

I'm going to say that it's true, because it's in part true for the public finances.

It's the heart of the public finances, but it's true, we don't solve everything with the retraites.

Working until 67 years, it's unacceptable.

Vrai.

Faux.

The suspension of the reform of 2023 is a error of 1,8 billion euros per year.

Faux.

Faux, it's plus.

Faux, it's 40 billion euros per year.

The capitalization is the retirement of the rich.

Vrai.

Faux in theory, a little true in practice because we don't have a collective capitalization.

Because we have the repartition.

But we could have a collective capitalization.

It's true in France, precisely because there are only rich who can afford to pay for the rest.

It's necessary to introduce a capitalization in the French system.

Faux.

It's already there, but it's already there.

It's minuscule, it's at 2%, it's largely increasing.

It's not a retirement.

Faux.

It's faux.

Faux.

The boomers have lived over the years in the next generation.

Too complex to answer by the fact or by the fact, I'm sorry.

It's factually true, but they weren't aware.

Same answer that Thomas.

If we have a superficie of this subject, we see that we were at 4 active for 1,7% for 1% today.

But that is a superficie.

It is to say that in 1960, I take the same year of base, we have 2x less, 2x less of active per retraite, it is true.

But each active produces 3x4x more of richness.

So in reality, our collective capacity, the active, to finance the retirement, the current retirement, is better today than 1960.

So all this discussion on the demographic degradation, it's people who only look at the demographic without taking into account the variable, the spectacular amount of productivity.

And that's why this reasoning is true.

Then there are others, but not the only prejudices that I hear.

I can respond quickly on the productivity?

With pleasure on the productivity ...

It's not that I'm going to be a bad thing.

It's because it's a bad thing.

You take a bad thing and then you say it's bad.

But no, no, no, no, I'm not.

I'm not.

So, the productivity is one of the key factors of the financing of a retirement system.

And it has evolved positively.

And it's very good.

And it's because of that we can keep the head out of the law, despite the demographic change, as important as it is.

And it's also a reality.

It's not that we have the head out of the world, but it's not that the collective collective of the active is superior to the 1960s.

But on can't say that the French Compte Publics do anything else than to maintain the head out of the law.

I mean, it's actually a reform which is why we have so many reforms at each time.

That is a reality, but it is a reality that we can't do it.

And the productivity, there are two things.

The first one, it is that yes, it will even better thanks to the IA, to the robotization of the economy.

So, to finance the constitution of a sovereign fund of retraites by capitalization, complementing the system by repartition, taxing robots and the IA,

which will bring this gain of productivity.

Why not a public fund?

public capitalization a public a company the company the company they do already very well so

we will be able to use the productivity but what we should also say is that the French

in not saying that because the simple fact that the

and the way that productivity increases more than

that it is to be a good

but there you will see it is a good you will see the difference so that productivity increases

more than that the ratio between active and retraités it works

rather than taking an example but the daily

the people understand the ratio of the expense that you use

doesn't even know the situation on which you want to do Well, of course, but you don't have to finish the examples.

And you say that it's a mess.

It's complicated.

Yes, the ratios don't work.

It's for that.

So it's not a good technology.

Sure.

So, on the productivity, there is also another reality, which is that these 15 years, the productivity in France has been increased.

And one of the reasons that explains it, according to what I can read, according to the economists, is that, among other words, the economy is more productive

because the companies can of more and less invest in because there are more and more, and that is a reality also, of charges and impôts who pay on the work.

But how does it make us the number one in Europe of directs and foreign investments if we are an enfer?

Yes, yes, yes.

But then, I don't understand if it's wrong, if it's difficult...

But to say that the companies in France can easily invest easily and that they are encouraged to do it, it's still...

The reality is that the current system is very low.

I just say that the diagnostics are contradictors.

If we were a enfer of investments, we wouldn't be a paralytic accueil of investments.

100

It's not a sophism, it's not a sophism.

101

It's not a sophism, it's not a sophism.

102

The trade by the epargne, because we talk about capitalization, I prefer to talk about the trade by the epargne.

103

It can be individual, it can be collective.

104

But the trade by the apartheid, it's also to go out of money, out of France, to make it to the French.

105

And that, instead of being used to behave like idiots of the world, that we have been 50 years old, that we become a little more a-run money, and that we also seek a rentability.

106

In parlant of chasseurs...

107

The debate is still between you two.

108

Just to be...

109

In parlant of chasseurs...

110

Just to be honest...

111

Because from all the debate, the debate is happening between you two.

112

I'm sorry, but I also want to pay with the tax tax tax tax tax.

113

I'm sorry, because I have a capitalization individual on the products where there is no frais, so that it doesn't go in frais,

114

for not to give an advantage fiscal to the companies, for that it really goes to people.

115

Well, on the vehicles of investment, I have no money to pay for it.

116

They don't have a profit.

117

I'm sorry, but I'm sorry.

118

I'm more favorable to a complete defiscalization of the PEA, which is a problem of sovereignty also for France.

119

Okay.

120

Because, again once, and I repeat it, 8% of the French only understand this system.

121

It is to take a look at the view.

122

The France, it's only 2% of the expenses of the retirement are of capitalization.

123

D'accord?

124

2%.

125

Spain, 5%, Italy, 8%, Germany, 12%, Suède, 33%, Great Britain,

126

50%, and the Pays-Bas, 60%.

127

I just want to know one thing.

128

We are clearly, and it's factually,

129

in this big planet system where every time we have in all countries a mix system between capitalization and repartition.

130

Why, Thomas, you consider it that it is absolutely not only a repartition?

131

Okay.

132

Why?

133

Yes, I hear you.

134

I have no problem with the private private private.

135

In fact, for me, the private private private, it's just an intention of doing something with the fric that you are in the way of doing and placing.

136

It's just an epargne.

137

It's a particular category of epargne.

138

It's all.

139

It's an epargne private.

140

I have no problem with that.

141

You make what you want with your pognon but not with tax expenses on our tax impôt.

142

I refuse that the tax credit is that the tax credit will benefit from the tax credit.

143

These tax credit are paid by all those who pay the tax, and I remind you that we pay all the tax credit, because at least we pay all the TVA.

144

So if you want to use your tax credit for financing a tax credit in Spain, to finance your tax credit, to go on the moon, you pay a vacation.

145

You talk about the extra money?

146

You are not a French French.

147

You are not a French French.

148

Because they have no power of money.

149

I have said that it's not the ultra-rich.

150

You are absolutely what you want with your income,

151

but not with the tax incentives which are financed with our impetus.

152

Why are there tax incentives?

153

Because the system is dominated by...

154

Because the parties of the right, when they are in power, do tax incentives for their tax incentives

155

in their political clientele which is made of the detainees

156

and detainees of the patrimoine

157

and it's there to help to finance the companies I'm in agreement with you

158

but to help to finance the companies I don't know

159

if this is the most important thing and it's there where Thomas I respond

160

I respond to you that you say you want to do what you want with your money

161

but the people don't have money because they already pay the system by repartition, how do they do it? it's a reality

162

how do they do it? it's a reality you have a

163

salaried media I want to know how to do it for a part of it How do they do for a price?

164

There are 700 dollars that they pay in the cotisation every month.

165

If it was invested...

166

You talk about ultra-riches.

167

I don't know what I said, but it's not a problem.

168

If you say, you say, you do what you want with your money, there are only ultra-riches who can't pay in the same time as the repartition.

169

Well, for starting...

170

In fact, if you want to tell me how to do for the people who can't pay for the debt?

171

The majority of the French.

172

The French is the way.

173

I'm completely coherent.

174

that the retraites are not repartible for everyone.

175

Because it's like everyone has one.

176

In other countries, they don't have one?

177

Because if you...

178

It's not a country that the only country who has not done at all of a repartible is the China, at the time of the dictator Pinochet.

179

And they came from...

180

The China?

181

The Chilean has done the reform of the retraites with no repartible repartible.

182

They are found with a very low pension and they have ended up abandoning this system.

183

Is that what you have heard of defending the pure capitalization?

184

I ask you why you don't want to make a mix between the two.

185

I'm not saying that I'm saying that in all the world, there is a retraite by repartition.

186

Of course, it's what we've said from all the time.

187

But why you don't want to do the two?

188

Why don't you want to do the cohabitation of the two?

189

I didn't understand.

190

What I said precisely is that you do what you want with your e-pargne, including...

191

You're very rich, yes.

192

It would be necessary to stop me with the words, because I'm not going to finish the phrase and it's very agaçant.

193

So I would say you have a repartition, that's guaranteed, it's a social.

194

And then if you have a pognon to pay for a few buts, do it.

195

And if it makes a mistake, it's very good.

196

Because the social social is the heritage of Vichy, dear friends.

197

René Belin, the minister of work, it's not the truth.

198

The left has made a lot of history.

199

And I think you will recognize it.

200

Because in fact, this fable, the report will be done with 20 seconds.

201

I assure you that it will not be 20 seconds.

202

That's incredible.

203

The time is going on, we have not enough time.

204

I just wanted to finish because, once again, I was cut.

205

So the man who prepared his coups for making a retraite by repartition equal.

206

This idea...

207

We'll do that and it's part.

208

This is an intellectual intellectual.

209

Well, the people will check it as always.

210

This idea, this idea, this idea,

211

this idea, this idea that the retraite by repartition is a heritage of Gauche is a...

212

The guy wants to place this thing, he wants to put things that I didn't say.

213

I didn't say that you didn't say that.

214

You said that it was a conquest.

215

Yes, because we are in a debate, if you don't want to talk to me, you say it's not a debate It's not a debate, it's a debate Yes, I place my argument I place,

216

I place, I place If you please, if you please, if you please Jean Jaurès was for capitalization,

217

my friend The one who introduced the repartition and was then after the national council of resistance was the regime

218

What he doesn't mean to say...

219

It's not a lot of time.

220

It's very frustrating.

221

The debate in these conditions is very frustrating.

222

He is in the permanent denigment of the arguments of the other.

223

He says that it's a shit, that it's a circus.

224

And that's not a very very virulent debate.

225

So I'm going to take a look at a lot of time

226

and to separate and to understand that we're talking about the fées and not your parents or whatever.

227

Thank you.

228

if today, someone who has 25 years, we have talked about the retirement system, what do you advise you?

229

What do you do?

230

Because there is the theory of what it would be, but there is the concrete life and the people who live today.

231

In reality, the scenario the most probable,

232

it is a pretty bad of the retirement in the 15 years.

233

Malgré all, in all, when we look at what happened in the 10 countries who have the same problem as we these 40 years ago,

234

when we look at the budget budgetary numbers of France, the way how the interest rates are in the way to evolve, when we look at all this,

235

the conclusion to which I arrive the most probable is a increase of the rate of 30% of the retirement around 2035-2040.

236

So we can say that it is It's not possible to generate the epargne and to place the epargne at long term,

237

because if we place the epargne at short term or long term, we can't do the same choices, and to go look for something like 5% per year,

238

the rendement of the epargne.

239

someone who is a private employee who is currently a employee of the private employee, we can say that if he puts 5% of what he gains to 5% of annual income,

240

which he does from his 30 to his 62 years, he will have a very correct retirement retirement for complete his retirement retirement.

241

I care about it that the most possible people know the reality of the system today

242

and that we reflect collectively in the case of this presidential campaign to have a supplementary financing.

243

Because if we limit, in my sense, to the wages and imposter, it's not optimal in the sense that there are other sources of financing

244

that all the other countries do not use and that we can offer in complement.

245

What is very sad in all this, is that the system by repartition, if it remains a single,

246

it will not, except to have a huge amount of income, financer.

247

Financer, voilà.

248

Et donc, à mon sens, il faut qu'on fasse de l'ingénierie, entre guillemets, collective pour aller chercher du rendement, de l'argent, là où il est.

249

Et moi, les propositions que je mets sur la table, c'est les touristes et les robots.

250

Voilà.

251

Thomas, et après je te laisserai la parole, Simon.

252

Alors, plusieurs choses.

253

Pourquoi je suis pour qu'on ait les retraites par répartition et basta ?

254

It's not a relationship with Vichy or Leon Blum or Jaurès or Napoleon.

255

I am for the retraites by repartition because this system is, for everyone to be precise, all the active for all the retrainers.

256

It's a system that is inherently inhaling and solidified.

257

The retraites by capitalization, by definition, it's each one for his own.

258

So, in one case, I'm morally agree with this system and politically agree with this system, but in the other, I'm not sure.

259

So I don't allow you to pay for your rent, but you do it with your money and without your income, you can pay for the tax benefits on the pay for a private loan.

260

My position is clear.

261

Next, the other point that I wanted to mention, is that since you have made some proposals, I will also make some proposals.

262

So, we can perfectly finance the equilibrium, or the excédent, if we suppress the exoneration of the dividends,

263

if we remove the exoneration patronal because why we have an exoneration patronal on the payroll, I don't see it.

264

And, especially, what I think...

265

For the uniting the chômage.

266

No, but...

267

For the uniting the chômage.

268

The lien of causality between the two is absolutely not demonstrated. And, especially...

269

On augmente the charges, there's no choice.

270

And, especially, and, especially, sanctioning lourdement the inégalities salariales, women and women and increasing the SMIC.

271

The system by repartition and precisely a system

272

that favor the inequalities of women because women have more than ever have a career.

273

And when we have a career, in the calculation of the retirement, it is very very, how to say,

274

nuisible for the pension that we touch on the retirement.

275

So the idea that the retirement by repartition would be the solution to the inequalities between men

276

and women is not quite correct correct.

277

C'est parce que je dis, ça tombe bien.

278

Je t'ai laissé parler, Thomas.

279

Oui, bien sûr.

280

Mais c'est pas ce que j'ai dit.

281

Laisse-moi parler.

282

Donc, tu m'as dit et tu es cohérent, tu as dit que moralement,

283

tu étais pour la répartition parce que c'était solidaire, que c'était les uns pour les autres.

284

Chacun pour tous.

285

Et que dans la capital, tu n'es pas capable de laisser parler l'autre.

286

Vous faites la même chose tous les deux.

287

C'est pas grave.

288

Vous n'êtes pas capable de ne pas intervenir une fois que je le parle.

289

C'est incroyable.

290

Simon, I don't do exactly the same thing.

291

So Simon, you can finish, there is no longer time.

292

Well, I'll listen to you.

293

So, I said that for you, morally, we have understood.

294

Why not both in the same time?

295

Because morally, a system where everyone is for his own, I have no reason to favor it.

296

And concerning women, I have not said that the system of repartition, you have to listen to Simon, I have not said that the system of repartition would not correct the inequalities of women.

297

What I said is that for the system of repartition to return to the equilibrium, it is to fight the inequalities of women, women, and there, especially by the amendments quite lourdes,

298

the recruitment of more than inspectors of work to respect the law, etc. But moral, you said, when you win, when you win,

299

when you win, So it's for that I'm going to ask

300

when you respond with firmness to a thing that I haven't said.

301

I understand, but again, you gain your life, so there is also a mix of two.

302

We pay for the money for the solidarity, and there is also a mix of two because you gain your life, maybe you pay your money, maybe you can't pay your money, and it's all at all,

303

and so you're all at all with this cohabitation between I'm going to pay my own life and help others.

304

So why in the case of retraites, this cohabitation is going to be a problem?

305

I've already answered two times, so I'm not going to answer three times.

306

Okay, the spectators will be able to answer your question.

307

Because you will still repeat the same argument.

308

Because the objective of a debate is to isolate the variable, the nœud of our different environment.

309

I'm going to finish by saying that I've already answered one, two, three times.

310

It's a parade because you're not coincé.

311

It's just that there's a moment you've got to vary your arguments.

312

Mathias, you've never explained it.

313

Mathias, last words?

314

It's not grave to be coincé.

315

It's really that.

316

It's not grave to be coincé.

317

I know you're young, but it's really...

318

I wanted to answer a point

319

that was raised by Simon a little bit earlier on the system that would be more favorable to the workers.

320

Some consider that it is true in the way it is calculated, but in reality, in fact...

321

I didn't say that it was favorable to the workers, I said that there was less than the workers for the workers.

322

In fact, it's a thought that it's a thought that the workers would be...

323

I never said that.

324

I think that the people of the private private private in France in average have a little bit similar.

325

It's just that they have less salary during their career and a little bit more.

326

So, in fact, to put on the staff on the staffs will not allow to solve the problem.

327

And then, we get with Thomas to have a good job for the most large number, and a collective system that protects the people who are the most fragile.

328

On is not sure about the start of the age of the start, by the way.

329

I'm against the start of the start of the age of the start of the start of the year

330

because each career is individualized.

331

I'm for an individualization.

332

I see my parents, they didn't have a desire to go to the retraite at 60 years.

333

My father, he had a career intellectual. So, obviously...

334

I'm for the individualization of the career.

335

I have an individualization of the career.

336

I have a great proposition

337

that's just to say that we have an age of start at the retraite free for the Black but legal, for the Black, all the Black, which is...

338

Ah, it's important to protect the job.

339

It's obvious that it's important to protect the job.

340

But in general, the idea that they are going to go to the job, non.

341

They try to keep as long as possible for having the top 1 and then to be free of their job.

342

And so I think...

343

To end the debate, the debate was more rude than usual.

344

It's not always like that.

345

It's never like that.

346

It's like that for now.

347

Because it's the job that's the job.

348

We could have a legal age of departure at the job

349

which would not be the same if we are at the job or at the job.

350

I am for the 60th grade of the Blue.

351

A Black who works for 65 years, it doesn't really shock me.

352

I can imagine myself working for 65 years.

353

But why not 50 years?

354

What is this?

355

It's a good question.

356

Why not 50 years?

357

There are some jobs where it's necessary.

358

I don't think that, for example, a living in a living, I don't think that they should work for 50 years.

359

I'm sure there are some jobs.

360

But you have 60 years.

361

Yes, because it's in charge of your physical state.

362

Pardon de le dire comme ça, mais c'est ça la variable fondamentale.

363

Et voir des délabrements psychiques aussi.

364

Mais ça, ça se mesure.

365

C'est des indicateurs de pénibilité qu'un certain nombre d'organisations patronales refusent de mettre comme indicateurs pour calculer le départ à la retraite.

366

Et c'est bien dommage, parce que c'est un truc objectif.

367

De dire, tu es dans une profession où l'état de délabrement fait que tu dois partir certainement pas à 65 ans.

368

Est-ce que vous voulez un pilote de ligne ?

369

70 ans, moi non.

370

La différence, c'est entre...

371

Si il est compétent et si il est bon, il y en a.

372

For concluding the debate, I think we share the same objective, it is to have a security security that will recover absolutely everyone,

373

and you propose to finance it by the socialization, not the debt.

374

By the economy, in any case, by France.

375

And I propose to finance it a little like that, but also by looking for performance, where it is.

376

And it is all around the world.

377

I consider that there is no reason to be deprived.

378

And if I'm a little bit of a question for terminar, I would say that the problem is that the capitalization,

379

the principle of capitalization, it is very difficult to say that it doesn't work.

380

We can say it's bad, but it doesn't work.

381

It's very difficult.

382

And so if ever all the population becomes an economy who capitalizes,

383

we have perhaps a ideological problem for a part of the left, for whom the capitalization is a problem by definition.

384

So it is possible

385

that one of the reasons of opposition to the generalization of the capitalization in the country is also a little bit ideological.

386

It is possible also that the opposition...

387

J'aurais, it was for the capitalization.

388

You were saying that Mathias, you were going to launch something.

389

It is possible also that the partisans of the private pay-per-partition of private pay-per-partition is a problem with the concept of solidarity.

390

It works in the two senses.

391

We have to find a balance.

392

It is possible that the party is a problem with the solidarity.

393

We have to find a balance.

394

Thank you.

395

Thank you all.

쉐도잉이란? 영어 실력을 빠르게 키우는 과학적 방법

쉐도잉(Shadowing)은 원래 전문 통역사 훈련을 위해 개발된 언어 학습 기법으로, 다언어 학자인 Dr. Alexander Arguelles에 의해 대중화된 방법입니다. 핵심 원리는 간단하지만 매우 강력합니다: 원어민의 영어를 들으면서 1~2초의 짧은 지연으로 즉시 소리 내어 따라 말하는 것——마치 '그림자(shadow)'처럼 화자를 따라가는 것입니다. 문법 공부나 수동적인 청취와 달리, 쉐도잉은 뇌와 입 근육이 동시에 실시간으로 영어를 처리하고 재현하도록 훈련합니다. 연구에 따르면 이 방법은 발음 정확도, 억양, 리듬, 연음, 청취력, 말하기 유창성을 크게 향상시킵니다. IELTS 스피킹 준비와 자연스러운 영어 소통을 원하는 분들에게 특히 효과적입니다.

쉐도잉 연습: Retraites : un expert de la finance explique le sujet à deux citoyens. - 영상으로 영어 말하기 배우기

이 동영상이 영어 회화 연습에 좋은 이유

자연스러운 표현 분석

shadowing 연습 루틴

쉐도잉이란? 영어 실력을 빠르게 키우는 과학적 방법