Except the riots on the streets aren't about wealth inequality, they're about a proposal for reduced government spending. Why? Government spending has been supported by constantly taking out new debt, and now both issuance of new debt is sputtering and increased interest payments are due.
This has, of course, not convinced the government to stop increasing debt. This is people's reaction to merely slightly reducing the rate of debt increase.
The problem is not even that the debt is too high, but because the state's demand for new debt just for this year is too high at the interest rates they're offering.
Sort of. Government spending usually turns into a debate about wealth inequality in the next step though, usually right around the time someone suggests paying for it all by taxing the rich.
Problem is, paying for it with resources taken from the rich requires 10% of ALL the resources the rich have (not from their income, everything). Per year. Which would cannibalize most businesses in France in the process.
Leaving aside how moral this is or isn't, and the practical problems (like destroying businesses, and the fact that capital can't actually be sold at the price it is valued), it would block the state's ability to lend, which would immediately force the state to save 20 times more than what the protests are about.
Actually doing what every party is screaming they want to do (pay for the state using the rich's resources) would cause an immediate disaster. But this is France, that doesn't mean they won't do it.
This has, of course, not convinced the government to stop increasing debt. This is people's reaction to merely slightly reducing the rate of debt increase.
The problem is not even that the debt is too high, but because the state's demand for new debt just for this year is too high at the interest rates they're offering.