Is the country therefore in danger, as Greece and Italy were during the euro crisis? Not really. During its famous debt auctions, Bercy continues to find buyers and "place the paper" without difficulty. It is true that a yield of around 5%, with inflation at 3%, is objectively a good deal.

Unless. Unless the issuer, in this case the French state, can no longer repay. Or organizes its own default, as the Directory did in 1797 by canceling two-thirds of the public debt of a country bled dry by the Revolution. A measure that makes Jean-Luc Mélenchon look moderate, since the leader of La France Insoumise is proposing to "throw into the fire" less than 20% of the debt, which still amounts to more than €600 billion. But this scenario, which would mean ignoring the treaties and effectively blowing up the euro zone, would indeed amount to hanging France, not by asphyxiation but by breaking its neck. We would move from crisis to crash. Investors would abandon France's signature, while Urssaf Caisse nationale, formerly Acoss, which is already being forced to borrow short-term, would no longer be able to pay pensions. The infernal machine would start turning: the European Central Bank would launch an emergency procedure to buy French government debt, with the implementation in return of an austerity plan drawn up with the men in black of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

This crash-and-purge scenario has already occurred within the euro zone. It sealed, for example, the end of Silvio Berlusconi, who did not survive politically after a letter dated August 2011, co-signed by the then European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet and Mario Draghi, then governor of the Bank of Italy. If there is to be a purge, it is better to avoid demagogues, and it was a former European commissioner, the dull Mario Monti, who took on the dirty work.

Are we there yet? Yes, according to Léo Barincou of Oxford Economics, who says that "an Italian-style scenario is taking shape for Paris." No, according to the otherwise highly vigilant Stéphane Boujnah: "There is neither a risk of IMF intervention nor a risk of a solvency crisis." And the head of Euronext was careful to specify that the real risk is "asphyxiation." That is what investors are anticipating for now, guided by the credit-rating agencies.

Scope Ratings, the only European agency, took action on Sept. 21 by cutting its rating from AA- to A+, with a "stable outlook." Not enough to trigger panic. Nor will there be panic on Oct. 23, when Moody's moves from Aa3 to A1. And probably not in November, when S&P Ratings changes the outlook on its A+ rating from "stable" to "negative." And yet, in the meantime, the budget debate and the farce in the National Assembly will once again have shaken the country. Even if this is already anticipated in the asphyxiation scenario.

The real risk, that of default and rupture, will come afterward. It can be located with fairly precise timing in the days following the second round of legislative elections, which will follow the dissolution of the National Assembly, itself following the presidential election. Given the constitutional timetable, that brings us, at best, to the end of June. Assuming no absolute majority emerges, a few days, or weeks, must then be added to form a government. Who will be at Matignon? At Bercy? What economic policy will be used to pull the country out of its predicament? The policy speech to the National Assembly will be scrutinized, as will the confrontation between the new government and leading business executives and investors at the Economic Meetings of Aix in early July, an event regularly attended by European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde. And then, anything is possible.

This is the famous "Liz Truss moment," when markets permanently lose confidence and dismiss politicians. On paper, the short-lived British prime minister and her finance minister, Kwasi Kwarteng, were more economically credible than Mélenchon or Le Pen. Under pressure from the beginnings of a bond-market crash, this Conservative government, and therefore one not considered extremist, was nevertheless driven from office in September 2022. Not for raising taxes, but for announcing tax cuts. Not for threatening to write off debt, but for announcing that it would continue issuing it. The international arbitrators, who hold nearly 60% of our outstanding public debt, are pragmatists. Extremists or the center bloc? Right-wing or left-wing? It does not matter. Only credibility counts. We will need some seriousness.

https://www.marketscreener.com/news/this-is-how-france-will-be-hanged-ce785ddbd98df523