France Plans 75% Tax Rate on the Rich?

[Socio]

http://www.nytimes.c...d.html?_r=2

President François Hollande is vowing to impose a 75 percent tax on the portion of anyone’s income above a million euros ($1.24 million) a year.

“We’re getting a lot of calls from high earners who are asking whether they should get out of France,” said Mr. Grandil, a partner at Altexis, which specializes in tax matters for corporations and the wealthy. “Even young, dynamic people pulling in 200,000 euros are wondering whether to remain in a country where making money is not considered a good thing.”

Sounds like we are about to see the money makers in France flee the country like rats on a sinking ship and then France implode in on itself.

Edited August 8, 2012 by Socio

[notoverrated]

i dont understand things like this -.- why cant everyone just pay the gov the same amount? or at least the same percentage.

[questionmark]

i dont understand things like this -.- why cant everyone just pay the gov the same amount? or at least the same percentage.

Because it is stupid to take away something from somebody on minimum wages and then give him foodstamps?

[Super-Fly]

Not so bad,

Just got to close off loop holes, and get them to pay it now.

LOL.

Thanks,

[notoverrated]

Because it is stupid to take away something from somebody on minimum wages and then give him foodstamps?

i just think you should have to pay more or less because of your position in life. i think that just leads to problems

[notoverrated]

i just think you shouldnt have to pay more or less because of your position in life. i think that just leads to problems

oops meant to edit not quote .... Edited August 8, 2012 by notoverrated

[Merc14]

Almost half the people in the US do not pay federal income tax. That is insane. What is even more insane is that they have the same vote as a person paying taxes. How is that fair and of course, the freeloaders will then vote for a party that guarantees they will never have to pay taxes. The end result is laughably obvious.

Income taxes need to be done away with and a consumption tax, like the fair tax, installed instead. Everybody pays. If that isn't possible then I wouldn't allow the freeloaders tio vote. F-em, you need to have skin in the game to play. Want a vote, get off your overweight fodstamp consuming, welfare lounging ass and work.

Invalids and elderly excepted of course.

[questionmark]

Almost half the people in the US do not pay federal income tax. That is insane. What is even more insane is that they have the same vote as a person paying taxes. How is that fair and of course, the freeloaders will then vote for a party that guarantees they will never have to pay taxes. The end result is laughably obvious.

Income taxes need to be done away with and a consumption tax, like the fair tax, installed instead. Everybody pays. If that isn't possible then I wouldn't allow the freeloaders tio vote. F-em, you need to have skin in the game to play. Want a vote, get off your overweight fodstamp consuming, welfare lounging ass and work.

Invalids and elderly excepted of course.

So you are proposing a good old plutocracy to dispose of the democracy?

Edited August 8, 2012 by questionmark

[Merc14]

So you are proposing a good old plutocracy to dispose of the democracy?

More of a poll tax but only if it is impossible to get a consumption tax in place of the absurd taxing system we now suffer through. BTW, we don't live in a democracy, we live in a representative republic. True democracy is onme of the most repressicve and dnagerous forms of government possible. Think of two wolves and a sheep voting on who will be dinner and you have a democracy.

[questionmark]

More of a poll tax but only if it is impossible to get a consumption tax in place of the absurd taxing system we now suffer through. BTW, we don't live in a democracy, we live in a representative republic. True democracy is onme of the most repressicve and dnagerous forms of government possible. Think of two wolves and a sheep voting on who will be dinner and you have a democracy.

The Republic is the state-form in which representatives are elected. These can be elected by universal suffrage, which makes the republic a democracy or they can be elected by their religion, which then makes the republic a theocracy or they can be elected because they are the most corrupt, that would make the republic an oligarchy. Being a republic does not exclude being a democracy, except in the heads of some who want to abolish it.

[Merc14]

The Republic is the state-form in which representatives are elected. These can be elected by universal suffrage, which makes the republic a democracy or they can be elected by their religion, which then makes the republic a theocracy or they can be elected because they are the most corrupt, that would make the republic an oligarchy. Being a republic does not exclude being a democracy, except in the heads of some who want to abolish it.

For your edification http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/AmericanIdeal/aspects/demrep.html

As far as me wanting to abolish anything you are right, I want to abolish a system that has been corrupted to the point that 47% pay zero federal income taxes while collecting 100% of the largesse their corrupt party rains on them at the expense of the productive members of society. Many fall on hard times and an advanced society should have social safety nets in place to help them through their time of trouble but I don't think any rational person would approve of generations of people living in those nets.

[questionmark]

For your edification http://www.lexrex.co...cts/demrep.html

As far as me wanting to abolish anything you are right, I want to abolish a system that has been corrupted to the point that 47% pay zero federal income taxes while collecting 100% of the largesse their corrupt party rains on them at the expense of the productive members of society. Many fall on hard times and an advanced society should have social safety nets in place to help them through their time of trouble but I don't think any rational person would approve of generations of people living in those nets.

They are talking about a direct democracy, which is not the only democratic form. There is a direct democracy where everything has to be decided by a majority of citizens, i.e. the Canton Uri in Switzerland where people congregate on the marketplace to agree or disagree on whatever the government has decided having the last say so. And then there is a representative democracy where you elect, by universal suffrage, a representative to have the ultimate say so. Most western Republics are representative democracies, including the US of A.

And about abolishing and yaddah yaddah... so you think it makes sense to employ people to give out food stamps because we just took their scarce food money away from them?

Now on top of it you are going to tell me that you favor a lean government, right?

[Merc14]

They are talking about a direct democracy, which is not the only democratic form. There is a direct democracy where everything has to be decided by a majority of citizens, i.e. the Canton Uri in Switzerland where people congregate on the marketplace to agree or disagree on whatever the government has decided having the last say so. And then there is a representative democracy where you elect, by universal suffrage, a representative to have the ultimate say so. Most western Republics are representative democracies, including the US of A.

And about abolishing and yaddah yaddah... so you think it makes sense to employ people to give out food stamps because we just took their scarce food money away from them?

Now on top of it you are going to tell me that you favor a lean government, right?

Get to your point instead of arguing semantics..

[questionmark]

Get to your point instead of arguing semantics..

It is hardly semantics but part of a reactionary campaign to build back the one man one vote principle of the universal suffrage we enjoy now. Looks like the Hunt Bros. campaign started in the 70s is bearing its fruit.

[Tiggs]

Income taxes need to be done away with and a consumption tax, like the fair tax, installed instead. Everybody pays. If that isn't possible then I wouldn't allow the freeloaders tio vote. F-em, you need to have skin in the game to play. Want a vote, get off your overweight fodstamp consuming, welfare lounging ass and work.

Skin in the game?

The people you're talking about are the poorest people in our society. Some of them literally don't know on a day-to-day basis whether or not they're going to eat.

Their lives can quite literally depend on who gets voted into government. That's real skin in the game. Real skin, real flesh and real blood.

More skin than hopefully you'll ever have in the game.

[Merc14]

Skin in the game?

The people you're talking about are the poorest people in our society. Some of them literally don't know on a day-to-day basis whether or not they're going to eat.

Their lives can quite literally depend on who gets voted into government. That's real skin in the game. Real skin, real flesh and real blood.

More skin than hopefully you'll ever have in the game.

Not knowing if they are going to eat? Where the hell do you live? I see billboards advertising foodstamps all over the place. We have millions on foodstamps and more joining everyday as the democrats bankrupt the country. What kind drivel are you reading because starvation is not a problem America is suffering from but morbid obesity certainly is and in a big way Starving fat people (seriously, I found one article trying to push that). I can link you to 1000s of articles on obesity as an epidemic among the poorest people in society, in both the US and the UK, (just Google "obesity and poverty" ) but Google "Starvation in America" and you get links to feedingamerica.org and The Hunger Games. LMAO. Hell, the administration is advertising foodtsames in freakin' Mexico.

[Tiggs]

Not knowing if they are going to eat? Where the hell do you live?

I live in a country where Food insecurity effects 14.5% of the population. Where do you live?

[Charlie Prime]

Sounds like we are about to see the money makers in France flee the country like rats on a sinking ship and then France implode in on itself.

Do you really believe Credit Argricole, Goldman Sachs, and Societe Generale are considering packing up shop and fleeing? Hahaha.

Yes, the "Man of the People" (who also happens to be a former aide to Francois Mitterand and is advised by Manuel Valls) is sooooooo gonna stick it to the rich.

Anyone who believes this silly propaganda somewhat deserves to live with O'Brien's boot on their face.

[Merc14]

I live in a country where Food insecurity effects 14.5% of the population. Where do you live?

Hence fooodstamps! Starvation is not an issue in this country, not by any measure. Anyone who has "food insecurity" contacts the USDA and gets foodstamps. Show me a legit artcle listing starvation as a major issue in America or move on. Obesity among the generational poor is a huge p[roblem, though, yet you seem to not want to address it. DO the google search as there are far to manty articles form myriad sources describing as an epidemic. Are we done now so you address the problem that 47% of voters don't pay any taxes to the feds yet get all the benfits? DO you think that is a problem or is it fine and if fine, at what number would you perceive it to be a problem, 70/30, 80/20?

[Tiggs]

Show me a legit artcle listing starvation as a major issue in America or move on.

I've already shown you a Government report from the department responsible for such, which states that 14.5% of the US population experience Food Insecurity.

How much more "legit" do you think it gets, exactly?

[Merc14]

I've already shown you a Government report from the department responsible for such, which states that 14.5% of the US population experience Food Insecurity.

How much more "legit" do you think it gets, exactly?

Yes and that is why we have foodstamps. USDA runs the program. those 14% go on foodstamps where, apparently, they get obese. LOL

Edited August 8, 2012 by Merc14

[Tiggs]

Yes and that is why we have foodstamps. USDA runs the program.

What I'm telling you and what you're apparently unable to understand, is that even with foodstamps, 14.5% of the population experience food insecurity.

[Merc14]

What I'm telling you and what you're apparently unable to understand, is that even with foodstamps, 14.5% of the population experience food insecurity.

I can read and that is NOT what it says. 14.5% had food insecurity at some time during the reporting period and the got on a program. Food insecurity does not mean starvation, it means the eating pattern was disrupted and they missed sa few meals. So they go on foodstamps. There is NOT a starvation crisis in America no matter how much you want to make one exist. There is, however, an obesity epidemicamong the poor, which you seem to want to ignore. Wh?

But we are way off subject and I can tell tyou are playing this game because you want to drag me off the subject, a standard liberal tactic so please answer the question regarding those who pay taxes and those who get a free ride and why they should have any say in how this country is run. All the benefits and no skin in the game, just the rightto take more away from others.

[Tiggs]

I can read and that is NOT what it says. 14.5% had food insecurity at some time during the reporting period and the got on a program. Food insecurity does not mean starvation, it means the eating pattern was disrupted and they missed sa few meals. So they go on foodstamps.

The report is based on a survey conducted by the Census Bureau. It has nothing to do with getting on a foodstamp program. Most of the families who reported conditions of food insecurity were already on foodstamps or other Government assistance for food.

There is NOT a starvation crisis in America no matter how much you want to make one exist. There is, however, an obesity epidemicamong the poor, which you seem to want to ignore. Wh?

I'm ignoring it because it's totally irrelevant. Simply put - not having enough food choices guarantees poor nutrition which leads to Obesity and Diabetes.

But we are way off subject and I can tell tyou are playing this game because you want to drag me off the subject, a standard liberal tactic so please answer the question regarding those who pay taxes and those who get a free ride and why they should have any say in how this country is run. All the benefits and no skin in the game, just the rightto take more away from others.

The conversation we're having is about having skin in the game. The simple fact is that unless your personal lifespan is in danger of being reduced due to living in crushing poverty - then you don't actually have any real skin in the game.

Most households pay taxes of some kind. Payroll taxes - the ones that fund all of these social programs that you're complaining about - are paid by 82% of all households - the remaining households being either elderly or with income below $20,000.

If you want to discuss the 47% that don't pay Federal taxes - if that's such a huge issue to you - perhaps you can start by telling us why Republicans object to letting the Bush Tax Cuts be repealed which would drop that number back to 36%?

[Merc14]

The conversation we're having is about having skin in the game. The simple fact is that unless your personal lifespan is in danger of being reduced due to living in crushing poverty - then you don't actually have any real skin in the game.

Most households pay taxes of some kind. Payroll taxes - the ones that fund all of these social programs that you're complaining about - are paid by 82% of all households - the remaining households being either elderly or with income below $20,000.

If you want to discuss the 47% that don't pay Federal taxes - if that's such a huge issue to you - perhaps you can start by telling us why Republicans object to letting the Bush Tax Cuts be repealed which would drop that number back to 36%?

No where in that report was starvation mentioned. You are greatly exaggerating the problem. I'll gladly discuss why the republicans are willing to let the "tax cuts" expire, they are unwilling to allow the debt to keep increasing. Also, they want to make the tax cuts permanent. Regardless, throwing the dems out of office will solve that little problem.

Can you explain to me why the Senate has not presented a budget, their constitutional duty, in nearly 1,100 days?

So 47% not paying taxes is fine by you. How about 70%? Is that fine by you? 80%? How much debt should the republicans allow? How about 100% of GDP because Obama has us at nearly 80% now. 120%?