• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Number Of Unemployed In France Passes 3 Million

T

The Prof

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,828
Reaction score
1,808
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The number of French unemployed has broken through the 3-million barrier for the first time since 1999, the country's leaders say.

The latest total adds pressure on President Francois Hollande, whose administration is under attack for not doing enough to fix the economy. France's unemployment rate is currently 10 percent.

Breaking the 3 million mark carries more symbolic importance than economic but it was covered extensively in the French media over the weekend. The Ministry of Employment says the 3-million threshold was crossed in 1996 and again in 1999.

Employment Minister Michel Sapin confirmed the total on French radio on Sunday and warned that the numbers would likely get worse.
Click to expand...

News from The Associated Press

what went wrong?

aug 8: France's 75% Tax Could Push Rich Into Mass Exodus - Rich thinking of leaving if 75% tax rate is passed

even the nyt reported that there is very little revenue to be gained from the 75% tax, it's purpose is "merely symbolic"

then why impel so many of those with means to flee?

class warfare never works, it only seeks to divide

so does barack obama's overwhelming focus on social issues, which we're all gonna see prominently on pimetime tv in charlotte

party on, progressives

forward---to where?
 
The Prof said:
News from The Associated Press

what went wrong?

aug 8: France's 75% Tax Could Push Rich Into Mass Exodus - Rich thinking of leaving if 75% tax rate is passed

even the nyt reported that there is very little revenue to be gained from the 75% tax, it's purpose is "merely symbolic"

then why impel so many of those with means to flee?

class warfare never works, it only seeks to divide

so does barack obama's overwhelming focus on social issues, which we're all gonna see prominently on pimetime tv in charlotte

party on, progressives

forward---to where?
Click to expand...

We had a 90% tax rate on the wealthy in the 50's under Eisenhower. I don't think you get the purpose. It's not to tax people at 90%. It's to reroute cash flow so that instead of them cashing out and making money with money via interest rates and whatnot, it encouraged reinvestment in their businesses and dealings which strengthened the economy and manufacturing.

Yet another The Prof spam thread debunked.
 
poweRob said:
We had a 90% tax rate on the wealthy in the 50's under Eisenhower. I don't think you get the purpose. It's not to tax people at 90%. It's to reroute cash flow so that instead of them cashing out and making money with money via interest rates and whatnot, it encouraged reinvestment in their businesses and dealings which strengthened the economy and manufacturing.

Yet another The Prof spam thread debunked.
Click to expand...

In other words, communism for the greater good.

Even Eisenhower admitted this was the problem of the military industrial congressional complex in his farewell speech. It wasn't merely that America was becoming loaded with warhawks, but that American culture was addicted to institutionalization, and creative thinking was dying as people solved problems to become popular, not to become.

The bottomline is results-oriented policies are anti-social because they ignore how economy is subjectively procedural. Judge people collectively, and subjectivity goes out the window which makes the economy meaningless.
 
Daktoria said:
In other words, communism for the greater good.
Click to expand...

* protip

The United States isn't communist nor was it communist in the 1950's.

Daktoria said:
Even Eisenhower admitted this was the problem of the military industrial congressional complex in his farewell speech. It wasn't merely that America was becoming loaded with warhawks, but that American culture was addicted to institutionalization, and creative thinking was dying as people solved problems to become popular, not to become.
Click to expand...

This has to do with the topic of high tax rate how?

Daktoria said:
The bottomline is results-oriented policies are anti-social because they ignore how economy is subjectively procedural. Judge people collectively, and subjectivity goes out the window which makes the economy meaningless.
Click to expand...

wut?
 
poweRob said:
* protip

The United States isn't communist nor was it communist in the 1950's.
Click to expand...

The U.S. is extremely communist. It's our culture to believe in secretive hierarchic collectivism where hard work comes before working smart.

People also take pride in economic imperfections rather than synchronization. It's an excuse for people to fix what's wrong.

This has to do with the topic of high tax rate how?

wut?
Click to expand...

If you don't know how taxes coincide with culture, you don't know Jack.
 
poweRob said:
We had a 90% tax rate on the wealthy in the 50's under Eisenhower. I don't think you get the purpose. It's not to tax people at 90%. It's to reroute cash flow so that instead of them cashing out and making money with money via interest rates and whatnot, it encouraged reinvestment in their businesses and dealings which strengthened the economy and manufacturing.

Yet another The Prof spam thread debunked.
Click to expand...

You give yourself too much credit.
 
Daktoria said:
Then start thinking. That way, you get back on yours.
Click to expand...

Ok... start me thinking on this.

Daktoria said:
The U.S. is extremely communist.
Click to expand...

Good luck justifying such a ridiculous claim. Because that's not "thinking". That's flat out making **** up and living in fantasy land.
 
poweRob said:
Ok... start me thinking on this.
Click to expand...

No, you can start thinking yourself.

See, I don't even need to read the rest because this alone shows you have a bad attitude. It doesn't matter what we're talking about.
 
Daktoria said:
No, you can start thinking yourself.
Click to expand...

People who think for themselves put enough together to realize that the United States isn't communist.

Daktoria said:
See, I don't even need to read the rest because this alone shows you have a bad attitude. It doesn't matter what we're talking about.
Click to expand...

That sure as hell didn't take very long for you to run away from supporting YOUR OWN claim.
 
poweRob said:
People who think for themselves put enough together to realize that the United States isn't communist.
Click to expand...

Thinking for oneself is analytic, not synthetic. That doesn't mean putting things together. That means coming up with fresh ideas.

It's no wonder you think the U.S. isn't communist - you're brainwashed into communizing your own mind.

That sure as hell didn't take very long for you to run away from supporting YOUR OWN claim.
Click to expand...

...says the guy who still hasn't understood Eisenhower's farewell speech or why we had 90% taxes.
 
Daktoria said:
Thinking for oneself is analytic, not synthetic. That doesn't mean putting things together. That means coming up with fresh ideas.

It's no wonder you think the U.S. isn't communist - you're brainwashed into communizing your own mind.



...says the guy who still hasn't understood Eisenhower's farewell speech or why we had 90% taxes.
Click to expand...

Coming up with new ideas is simple, it requires very little thinking

Coming up with new valid ideas is what is difficult and requires thinking. The idea that the US is communist is of the fi a=rst example. I could just as easily say the US is a fascist theocratic state populated by junkies and sex offenders. Neither are valid ideas and neither require much thinking
 
I agree. America's left believes in power politics and intelligent design inspired social gospel. It's certainly a bunch of fascist theocrats.
 
*snort*

My noble response was derailed by Daktoria's silliness in boldly declaring that we're all communists.

Gee - I just didn't know.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
*snort*

My noble response was derailed by Daktoria's silliness in boldly declaring that we're all communists.

Gee - I just didn't know.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I don't mean to state the obvious.

That said, I didn't say everyone's a communist. Once in a while, you find a needle in a haystack. Most people are just paranoid psychopaths in today's America who have no interest in openly, yet considerately, socializing with their common man. Instead, they expect everyone to conform into being well behaved.
 
Well - everyone says I'm quite sharp - so that must mean I'm quite the needle :)
 
Daktoria said:
Sorry, I don't mean to state the obvious.

That said, I didn't say everyone's a communist. Once in a while, you find a needle in a haystack. Most people are just paranoid psychopaths in today's America who have no interest in openly, yet considerately, socializing with their common man. Instead, they expect everyone to conform into being well behaved.
Click to expand...



Well heck if you want to use your own personal definition of what communism is, then by golly the entire world is communist, except of course recluses living in the woods surviving as a cave man, making his or her own tools and finding his or her own food
 
Aunt Spiker said:
*snort*

My noble response was derailed by Daktoria's silliness in boldly declaring that we're all communists.

Gee - I just didn't know.
Click to expand...

See you at the party meeting comrade. Sorry I let him derail your point by not ignoring him. My bad.
 
poweRob said:
See you at the party meeting comrade. Sorry I let him derail your point by not ignoring him. My bad.
Click to expand...

LOL - actually, you already made my point so I thought I'd interject with a side of humor instead of restating the stated.
 
poweRob said:
We had a 90% tax rate on the wealthy in the 50's under Eisenhower. I don't think you get the purpose. It's not to tax people at 90%. It's to reroute cash flow so that instead of them cashing out and making money with money via interest rates and whatnot, it encouraged reinvestment in their businesses and dealings which strengthened the economy and manufacturing.

Yet another The Prof spam thread debunked.
Click to expand...

So, do you support raising the capital gains tax?
 
apdst said:
So, do you support raising the capital gains tax?
Click to expand...

I'd restructure taxes altogether and start taxing the hell out of derivatives, speculation and put in a investment transaction fee. Don't know how much I'd toy with capital gains.
 
poweRob said:
I'd restructure taxes altogether and start taxing the hell out of derivatives, speculation and put in a investment transaction fee. Don't know how much I'd toy with capital gains.
Click to expand...

Tax the hell out of derivatives? Why would you screw so many retirees?

How would you even tax speculation? That one is hillarious!

Investment transaction fee? Again, why would you screw so many retirees?

Just...wow!
 
poweRob said:
We had a 90% tax rate on the wealthy in the 50's under Eisenhower. I don't think you get the purpose. It's not to tax people at 90%. It's to reroute cash flow so that instead of them cashing out and making money with money via interest rates and whatnot, it encouraged reinvestment in their businesses and dealings which strengthened the economy and manufacturing.

Yet another The Prof spam thread debunked.
Click to expand...

Lets cherry pick in 1916 the tax rate was 2% up to $20,000 and the top rate was 15% after you made over $2,000,000, and that was in 1916

To your second point, people would reinvest instead of paying 90% only if they could write off that investment, otherwise they still have to pay the 90%. Take capital gains, when tax capital gains you drive investors out of reinvesting..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom