French Socialists Approve 75% Tax Rate for High Earners

reply to post by FlyersFan


Heaven forbid the French government does the will of the people!!

The average citizen is now awake and we know the elite doesn't care about the rest of us and there policies hurt the rest of us while they benefit off the backs of the people.

The more the conservatives of the world expand the police state and income and wealth inequality the more the left will rise, its a cause and effect thing.

Absolutely great move by the French.


While we dropped (or more accurately, The Conservative Party dropped) the 50% tax rate to 45%, the French have the sense to go the other way.



This should happen everywhere until the financial mess is sorted out.


Unfortunately most (through the media and right wing "what's mine is mine" propaganda) will be against this and come to be told that this is a bad thing and how it will drive business away from our countries.

People like David Cameron in the UK only serve to PROTECT big business and big banks.... he will do everything in his power to avoid the City of London and the Financial District having to be regulated and pay their fair share..... as will those in America and elsewhere with the same desire.

Iceland should be an example to all of us how people can really make a difference and throw out and overthrow the crooked banksters and politicians.


www.abovetopsecret.com...


It can be done, we just wont allow it.

People can't set aside stupid petty differences and just stand up together.

Oh well.

Well done France says I.

Pointless us doing it in the UK, doesn't matter what the tax level is the richest simply look for loopholes and ways to fiddle their taxes so that they pay very little anyway.

Same as the large corporations etc.

But sure as night follows day HMRC hound ordinary, everyday people and small buinesses etc and screw them for every last penny they can bleed out of them.

reply to post by nuclear12346


Socialism will always lead into a oligarchy. People will want more and more and more until it crashes. Then what will rise from the ashes is the truly scary thing. Look back at Germany in the 30s and what there socialist empire really meant.


Hitler was a union leader until he got full power then he destroyed them.

reply to post by SubTruth

Socialism will always lead into a oligarchy.

Possibly.
But so does Capitalism.
So does every ism.

People will want more and more and more until it crashes.

So maybe it's people who are the common denominator and not the theory?

.......Hitler was a union leader until he got full power.......

No he wasn't.

then he destroyed them.

Come on now, it's not as if Unions were his only target, he tried to destroy everybody who he perceived as a threat or disagreed with him.

Wow, people actually defending this? Holy crap. no comment

most of the tax $ goes to the mega rich who pay no taxes

high tax is robbery

income tax was invented for ww1 after the fed took power

most rich people have a good family business and work hard and are motivated

the big brother governments are owned by the corporations getting the bulk of the tax $

It is a bit steep, but if these job creators didn't pay themselves massive overrated salaries and paid low income workers a fairer wage instead of pocketing the record profits all to themselves, then maybe everybody else could chip in a bit more, but as it is, the rich want it all but complain they are the only ones left with any wealth to tax.

but that being said i wouldn't agree 75% is fair.

Originally posted by nuclear12346
Because its not like corporate welfare hasn't raped this world for trillions.

How dare they ask for a small % back.

If France has positive growth after these policies are implemented, it will be a big wake-up call to how much people are lying about the so called "job creators" worth.

However, if it falls apart at the seams then yes they should dismantle such policies as rapidly as they can.

edit on 4-7-2012 by nuclear12346 because: (no reason given)

Really 75% is small?............ I would what a large tax rate would be to you?

France is starting back down a failed path........ what happens when there are no more rich people left? Who will they rob from then?

reply to post by FlyersFan


As long as the rich do not rebel or stage a mass revolution they are probably going to get away with it.

In this country (where I grew up) they do it the other way.
There is a flat tax now, which results in about a sudden 3 billion budgetary loss (for 10 million inhabitants), which the government is trying to scramble from poor people mainly.

Guess what?
There is... just a bit more of them.

So if it ever comes to a showdown, math really counts.

reply to post by Freeborn


What do you think the NAZI party stood for? Learning the past will show us the future. Hitler loved the early progressive movement and modeled himself after it. The gas chambers were not made for the Jews they were made for the people who did not contribute to the whole. He was a progressive.




Hitler was a progressive prove me wrong.

Originally posted by Wertdagf
LOL yeah because we all all know people with desk jobs deserve to live in mansions.
the work is sooooo hard it took so much education..

People deserve to get paid for what they do.
Go to college ... earn an engineering degree ... get paid for your brain power.

Seriously .. you just sound jealous.

Originally posted by randomname
if the rich are just going to store their wealth in a computer database, what good is it doing anybody.

It's THEIR money. They earned it. It's THEIRS.
It's NONE OF OUR BUSINESS if they want to save it or spend it or invest it.

reply to post by SubTruth

What do you think the NAZI party stood for?

Hitler was working for Captain Mayr who was head of propoganda etc for The Bavarian Army and was ordered to visit a meeting of the German Workers Party, DAP, as the inclusion of the word 'Workers' suggested it may be a left-wing organisation.
However, the DAP was a nationalist party and was aligned to the volkisch movement.

Hitler was asked to join the party by it's leader Anton Drexler and rapidly became a prominent figure within the party.

The words National and Socialist were later added to the party name in an effort to attract the disenchanted from across the political spectrum.

The NSDAP was anti-Marxist, anti-Capitalist, ant-Semetic, in fact it was practically anti everything that didn't have a Nationalist flavour or slant.

Learning the past will show us the future.

Yes.

Hitler loved the early progressive movement and modeled himself after it.

No he didn't.
Read the testimonies and accounts of August Kubizek and Reinhold Hanish.

The gas chambers were not made for the Jews they were made for the people who did not contribute to the whole.

They were designed as a final solution to the jewish question - an added bonus for Hitler was that he could also use them to get rid of anyone who disagreed with him or who he had taken offence to etc as well.

He was a progressive.

I've read and heard him being described as a lot of things - I am voracious reader of anything relating to Hitler, especially his early life - but never a progressive.

By the way, what actually constitutes a 'progressive'?

Hitler was a progressive prove me wrong.

I refer The Honourable Gentleman to answer I gave earlier.

Oh, and more importantly - exactly where is the relevance to the topic?

Perhaps you should start a thread about Hitler and we'll continue the discussion there as it's not really right that we derail this thread.

reply to post by FlyersFan


My outook: Taking from the right pocket to fill the left pocket does not explain how this tax increase will result in economic expansion. It explains how President Hollande's administration intends to meet deficit goals (with the inclusion of minor budget cuts), but it does not address the disincentive this tax signal transmits to current & potential investors, or how this maneuver will motivate economic expansion.

If these

The government’s budget is counting on the economy expanding 0.3 percent this year, 1.2 percent in 2013, and 2 to 2.5 percent annually from 2014 to 2017.

benchmarks aren't met I presume there will be ... a problem.

Excellent post.

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by SubTruth

 

What do you think the NAZI party stood for?

Hitler was working for Captain Mayr who was head of propoganda etc for The Bavarian Army and was ordered to visit a meeting of the German Workers Party, DAP, as the inclusion of the word 'Workers' suggested it may be a left-wing organisation.
However, the DAP was a nationalist party and was aligned to the volkisch movement.

Hitler was asked to join the party by it's leader Anton Drexler and rapidly became a prominent figure within the party.

The words National and Socialist were later added to the party name in an effort to attract the disenchanted from across the political spectrum.

The NSDAP was anti-Marxist, anti-Capitalist, ant-Semetic, in fact it was practically anti everything that didn't have a Nationalist flavour or slant.

Learning the past will show us the future.

Yes.

Hitler loved the early progressive movement and modeled himself after it.

No he didn't.
Read the testimonies and accounts of August Kubizek and Reinhold Hanish.

The gas chambers were not made for the Jews they were made for the people who did not contribute to the whole.

They were designed as a final solution to the jewish question - an added bonus for Hitler was that he could also use them to get rid of anyone who disagreed with him or who he had taken offence to etc as well.

He was a progressive.

I've read and heard him being described as a lot of things - I am voracious reader of anything relating to Hitler, especially his early life - but never a progressive.

By the way, what actually constitutes a 'progressive'?

Hitler was a progressive prove me wrong.

I refer The Honourable Gentleman to answer I gave earlier.

Oh, and more importantly - exactly where is the relevance to the topic?

Perhaps you should start a thread about Hitler and we'll continue the discussion there as it's not really right that we derail this thread.

edit on 4/7/12 by Freeborn because: typo

What do you think the DAP was? It was the German workers party. Spin it however you want Progressives love to re-write history to fit there needs. The gas chambers were at first portable and were for the retarded and the indigent.


You are right we should argue this in another thread but your view of the truth is wrong. You mention you love to read about Hitler I recommend-----Hitlers pope. Good argument I must admit.

reply to post by drwizardphd


You say CEO's are a drain on society, yet you covet their money.
Sounds extremely hypocritical if you ask me.

In case you didn't know, hating is much worse than worshipping.
But no one is worshipping the rich here because the love of money is the root of all evil, so you should be extremely careful because I know you would just LOVE to have all their money.

You say a CEO's worth is the result of nepotism, luck and inheritance,
Well so freakin' what!
How ever they got their money is none if your business, but if they are of questionable character, I believe in karma so they will get theirs in due time.
You conveniently neglected to mention the ones that were once extremely poor and made their wealth the old fashioned way, by starting at the bottom and earning every penny.

Why are you pigeon holing them in with the rest?

What about the diversity you all preach about?

wow i'd quit my job and get on welfare

reply to post by RealSpoke


Paccsr shows a negative tax rate. Wtf? Did they get a bailout? maybe if paccar hadnt screwed up kenworths and peterbilts theyd make money! Come on, plastic headlights on a 389?

Not much incentive then to risk your time, energy and capital starting a business and building into something. Much easier to just stay on the low end and live off the system.