France's billionaires put US super rich to shame: "TAX US MORE"

How refreshing to see this story from the BBC today:

France's richest say: Tax us more

Some of France's wealthiest people have called on the government to tackle its deficit by raising taxes - on the rich.

Sixteen executives, including Europe's richest woman, the L'Oreal heiress Liliane Bettencourt, offered in an open letter to pay a "special contribution" in a spirit of "solidarity".

Later the government is due to announce tighter fiscal measures as it seeks to reassure markets and curb the deficit.

They are expected to include a special tax on the super-rich.

As opposed to the US version, "just print more money, raise our credit limit and spend until we die".

The US rich don't want to do anything with their money except depopulate the world or work on Gate's Foundation Vaccines.

Very refreshing to see this indeed!

All the best, Kiwifoot

Once again I have to ask: what was stopping these people from freely giving their property to the government? Why do they call for some mandate or legislative/regulatory action? Isnt it simpler for them to just cut a check?

That, to me, throws all off these "billionaires call for more taxation" stories/threads/blogs out the window. They want something that goes far beyond paying more into the government.

reply to post by kiwifoot


U.S. billionaire Warren Buffett has been singing this song, it's been in the media. While it's a lovely gesture for the French mega-money folks to speak of offering a contribution for their government, it's comparing apples to oranges for the US mega-rich and their government.

We have leaders that took us right into the debt we are under. If a group hands them a pile of cash, do you really think they would handle it responsibly? Based on what we have now, they have proven they are unwilling to do so.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Once again I have to ask: what was stopping these people from freely giving their property to the government? Why do they call for some mandate or legislative/regulatory action? Isnt it simpler for them to just cut a check?

I see your point but feel that a higher tax contribution would be far more sensible.

A pay off is a one time only deal, whereas higher tax means a percentage of future income which when talking the numbers these guys surely earn, is far more.

@ LargeFries

As for the the US billionaires, all propped up by the TARP, stimulus and government, how many billions were wasted on this, and I'm sure that the US billionaires were not blameless in bringing in the Credit crunch!

All the best, kiwi

reply to post by LargeFries



I was going to bring Mr. Buffets name into the ring with pretty much the same line of thought

Why don't they just pay more if they don't feel like they are being taxed enough?

That is the problem that I always see. All these super wealthy people claiming the "rich" should pay more yet they are the ones that are using the tax laws to NOT pay as much in taxes.

Also, taxing rich people, or poor people, or the middle class more isn't going to solve anything. The government is just going to look at it as more money coming in to spend on everything other than what they should be spending it on.

Evidence of this is the fact that every time they say we need to raise taxes to get out of debt more new spending comes along in the form of programs or entitlement programs. Why should the government tax anyone anymore than they already do since they have proven that they can't manage what they take from us now?

Originally posted by kiwifoot\
A pay off is a one time only deal, whereas higher tax means a percentage of future income which when talking the numbers these guys surely earn, is far more.

Who said anything about a one-time payment? They can pay up every day, week, month, year or minute if they wanted.

How many of these billionaires get paychecks anyway? My guess is hardly any if any. They likely have some accountant pay off their tax burden quarterly. They can't throw a little "bonus" check to the gov if they wanted?

This "call to action" is absurd. They are ignoring the easy path and calling for a hard all-encompassing and government created path when there is simply no reason to do so.

How is it apples and oranges when it's a GLOBAL problem?
The uber-rich who are suggesting this are, imo, decent people who are willing to do the right thing. At first blush I starred the idea that they should just "write a check" if they want to help, but it's true that without some kind of umbrella the money would just be squandered. (Probably on some co-called humanitarian rights civil war that we have no business being involved in anyway.)

With it being in the tax code, then ALL of the rich would have to pay in, not just the Buffets and the French rich folks who honestly know they could help. It really is prudent to have a structure in place that ensures that it's not just a "handout" from a few, but that their peers are to be included as well.

And it would, hopefully, be applicable to future years as well.

I'm still learning about how the world's economy works on a macro level, and trying to sift through the schools of thought. I am by no means an expert or an analyst or even financially "comfortable", let alone rich or retired...so I mostly rely on my common sense (which has enabled me to stay afloat and to balance my household budget, at least).
Having said that, I have thought for a long time that there should be a cap on wealth. For example, once a person owns X amount of whatever-assets, everything else should go into a pot for the benefit of those who are suffering or struggling.

Some might say "Socialist!" but in reality, in REAL reality, all of the pushing and shoving and hoarding and gloating and begging and starving is an illusion. What matters is our compassion and reverence for the one-ness that is ours all together.

When you all get up to your bangs for the day in reading about the doom and gloom of the economy, I have a suggested read for you: Pick up a copy of The Tibetan Book of the Dead (I'm reading it now, orig copyright is 1925) edited by W.Y.Evans-Wentz, translated by a Tibetan Lama. Go slowly, read the intros and the forewords and prefaces and all the jazz that comes before the actual translated text, and read the footnotes too. You'll learn a lot, or if you're already familiar with it, you'll be reminded of some important things. You'll also be comforted to know what the criminal bankster racketeers will be suffering one day, all alone.

All the best, people. Do your best to be the best you can be. Stay humble, and learn to live simply. Enjoy nature, take time to think and contemplate. Money doesn't have to rule the world that you live in. It's up to you.

1. Taxes are inhumane as they lead to slavery.

2. When the government has the ability to print money taxes become irrelevant, and therefore immoral.

3. It is unconstitutional to tax one group over another as it violates the clause that all laws must be uniform throughout the united states.

4. The globalists wouldn't be taxed, or if they were they'd retreat to some safe haven, the only people to be taxed are middle to upper-class. Asking the government to raise taxes on the rich is essentially building your own gallows.

reply to post by kiwifoot


French stupidity never ceases to amaze me. No wonder why their economy is worse off then the US, and about to bankrupt, the wealthy are giving their money way.

Originally posted by kellynap43
reply to post by kiwifoot

 

French stupidity never ceases to amaze me. No wonder why their economy is worse off then the US, and about to bankrupt, the wealthy are giving their money way.

Not even. They are apparently too stupid to give it away and are begging for somebody to come and take it at gun point.

Well I'm not afraid to be the first to F&S this thread and I think it's great that some of the uber rich are coming forward to do the right thing. The problems currently being faced in Europe are derived from the same cause as those here in the U.S. which is the fact that they too, bought into the "Trickle-Down" theory and lowered corporate taxes, just to see their countries face default as a result.

I only hope that this doesn't mean that I have to go back to eating "Freedom Fries."

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


ITs almost like their asking for the "chains" to be put on

Maybe they miss all the German Invasions and dictatorship in mid to early 20th century. Maybe they would like to go back to that.

Yet, the real purpose of the gesture was to remind the French of this:

They warned, however, that the contribution should not be so severe that it would provoke an exodus of the rich or increased tax avoidance.

And clearly the subtlety of the message is so expertly done, it has many of you falling all over yourselves making the claim they are somehow better than their American counterparts.



But all joking aside. Punish the rich for their success and watch them leave in droves and take their money elsewhere.

Fair warning. Be careful what you wish for....

Originally posted by Flatfish

I only hope that this doesn't mean that I have to go back to eating "Freedom Fries."

Well you probably dont like cake then.

This french responce is what you get in a country thats national is anthem "god save the guillotine".

Originally posted by LargeFries
reply to post by kiwifoot

 

U.S. billionaire Warren Buffett has been singing this song, it's been in the media. While it's a lovely gesture for the French mega-money folks to speak of offering a contribution for their government, it's comparing apples to oranges for the US mega-rich and their government.

We have leaders that took us right into the debt we are under. If a group hands them a pile of cash, do you really think they would handle it responsibly? Based on what we have now, they have proven they are unwilling to do so.

Warren Buggery (sorry, Autocorrect did that, thought it was funny so I'm leaving it) preaches this and that about helping out the middle class and such. Many of his promises come after he is dead. And what court (especially in Nebraska, I was from there so I got an in) won't uphold the rights of his children and family to his massive load of scratch? You can write a will all you want in that state, but spouse is guarenteed 50% and offspring split the rest if you contest it.
So bravo, buffet...you're just another shill.
Maybe you and your buddy bill gates can give the billions you pledged to Africa now? No?
We can see through that whole scheme anyway...what's the last untapped consumer market?
Throw just 3 billion in the kitty and every child in the US could go to a newly constructed school.
These super rich bungholes that think they have the best interests at heart of we 90% poor ass Americans are filling you full of it. Don't buy it. Or his damn insurance. Yes, that's what he made his cash off of, insurance. Which is what, pay me lots of money, and when you die, or maybe if you have a mishap, we will pay you virtually what you paid US if not a little less.
Buffett is not your friend, if he was, he'd be giving out that money now. He is just an attention whores.

The revolving door between corporations and government should make these latest words from the elite seem all too convenient. "Ya, I should give my money to me, or my cronies." And so the richer than average, but less than elite will get screwed too.

Originally posted by kiwifoot

How refreshing to see this story from the BBC today:

And this is why I love seeing the Elite continue to shaft the dumbo masses.

Originally posted by wildtimes
Some might say "Socialist!" but in reality, in REAL reality, all of the pushing and shoving and hoarding and gloating and begging and starving is an illusion. What matters is our compassion and reverence for the one-ness that is ours all together.

I HAD to quote this one part.
You have no clue how badly I want to shake your hand sir. You are truly one of the too few that can see past the illusion and grasp the bigger picture. Being "socialistic" shouldn't be viewed as having to sacrifice anything. In fact, it should be the other way around. We should be trying to raise the bar (for us) WHILE raising the bottom line (the poor) conditions simultaneously.

We live in a world of excess, yet 90% of the worlds population lacks any real purchasing power. How much food goes to waste at grocery stores? bakeries? etc. etc. when that food can be given to food banks or homeless shelters instead of throwing it out because somebody didn't buy it. And then you have a bunch of old hags (like the queen) and a bunch of other old farts (rothschilds, buffett, soros etc.) hoarding all the cash, gold, diamonds, oil, water, and anything deemed as an "asset"... I hate old people... but not all of them. There's this nice old lady who's good friends with my mom and I guess she really appreciated that I sat down and had a legit conversation with her because she always sends me some chocolate chip banana bread that she bakes lol, no complaining here

But for real... something has to give. THEY want us to react violently... don't give in. TO ANYONE OUT THERE WHO IS AWAKE... you'll understand these words; Be proactive and constructive, not reactive and destructive.

☮☮☮☮☮ Protons Electrons Always Cause Explosions ☮☮☮☮☮

Originally posted by kellynap43
reply to post by kiwifoot

 

French stupidity never ceases to amaze me. No wonder why their economy is worse off then the US, and about to bankrupt, the wealthy are giving their money way.

Uh, the french still have the triple A my friend, the US has double A. You are in a bad position for saying such things. The french and german are the leading economies in Europe (why they are the ones Europeans turn to when other countries are failing).

This seems totally normal to me, knowing the french mentality. "Solidarity" is a concept us Americans don't get very well. If they only gave of their wealth alone, that would be seen as doing it just to look good individuallly. Making a effort only for appearences and to increase their own ego. Insisting that all others in their position also pitch in with them is more close to the value of solidarity (all for one and one for all).

Also, the government is not seen as separate from the people. The people ultimately control the government so giving the government the right to determine how much to take from them and when is giving the power to the people. If they were to choose how much and when to give, they are keeping their power over the people for themselves.

That is just explaining the french point of view, and how it fits in with that.