Alain Minc has his story wrong about France's economic success

Alain Minc, a French writer, businessman and French establishment insider was interviewed by the BBC World on Hardtalk today (08-05-2006). During the interview he made some interesting statements about France:

We are ending a very bad period

With this he meant that the Jacques Chirac government had been very bad for France economically. This is an interesting comment when put together with the quote about France being the second country in the world receiving foreign investment.

We don't change because we are not poor enough

In this context he stated that the United Kingdom was ripe for change in the beginning of the 90's when Thatcher reached power. He quotes his memories of 1979 in London to say "I remember London in 1979, the trash on the streets the lack of electricity..."

We will change because it is a fact of life that we need to change

We argues that France is a country that cannot avoid change into a much more market oriented economy. He further argues that the change to a market economy is a "natural" change that cannot be avoided.

France is number 2 in the foreign investment - that is a sign that we are changing.
France is schizophrenic country, on one side one of the best productivities rates in the world [but there is also a side that is unproductive]. We have a very dynamic side, that's why we are receiving foreign investment.

He argues that France is a very dynamic country despite the government's actions.

Interesting comments... He basically states that all the laws and interventions that were caused by strikes and demonstrations on the street could not together avoid the fact that France is a very dynamic country and is bound to be an economic success in the future.
Quite a strong statement wouldn't you think? Despite all interventions France has survived Jacques Chirac's "leftism".
One would say that all evidence suggests otherwise. I mean, in his own admission "France is the second biggest receiver of foreign investment in the world". At least part of that should be due to state intervention wouldn't you say? This is not so strange if you believe that businesses actually search for stability, not for risk. With the world's stock exchanges representing more than 95% of the world's wealth risk is not the first thing that businesses or investors want. Despite France's strikes and state intervention it is clear for businesses that the French government will do anything to keep a bad business going. That's why the foreign investment is going to France, not because of the "dynamism" of the economy.
If you think that the largest receiver of foreign investment is China you can start to draw a parallel.
State intervention is good for business, not bad. It happens that it is also good for the workers (avoiding the sudden impact of globalization on unemployment, for example).
Alain Minc is against intervention not because of it's negative economic impacts but because his clients (he is a business advisor) don't like the current government intervention in France because it has not gone their way (he stated in the show several times that he "ignores"/"hates" Jacques Chirac).