• 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!

The French go OTT on the Champs Elysees

Jack Hays said:
Your link has nothing to do with income disparity.
Click to expand...

Oupps, you're right.

Here is the link intended from the UofCal study:
2DfGB.png


It shows that half the total Income generated is split evenly between two very different population groups.

Now, do you think it is right and proper that the upper TenPercenters should obtain the same percentage of Income (including capital gains) as the other 90%?

I don't ...
 
Last edited:
Rogue Valley said:
It began with climate, but it has morphed into something quite removed from that.

Russian links to 'yellow vests' protests to be probed

You may elect to ignore this to satisfy your dreadful climate narrative, but I won't ignore Kremlin meddling here.
Click to expand...

That's because you WANT the Kremlin to be your hobby-horse "can-do-no-good".

Now, do tell me, if you were Putin and your daughter had bought an expensive winery in Bordeaux where she goes summers, would you screw-around with the French?

I don't think so. Putin is not THAT STOOPID*...

*If push-comes-to-shove in Russia, Bordeaux is where Putin will be heading to save his sorry derriere.
 
Lafayette said:
Now, do tell me, if you were Putin and your daughter had bought an expensive winery in Bordeaux where she goes summers, would you screw-around with the French?

I don't think so. Putin is not THAT STOOPID*...

*If push-comes-to-shove in Russia, Bordeaux is where Putin will be heading to save his sorry derriere.
Click to expand...

I don't get the joke.
 
And I'm not surprised ...
 
Lafayette said:
The 2017 French corporate tax rate was 15% of the taxable income up to and including €38,120, 28% up to €75,000 and above which the rate is 33.3%. By 2020, the whole taxable income of all companies will be taxed at 28%. On 7 November 2017 the French National Assembly approved a new corporate tax.

The tax-rate cut in 2017 on Wealth was a colossal error. I think Macron today regrets what he did last year.

What he said last year:


Given that he was Hollande's Minister of Finance in the previous administration, I wonder if he has that same opinion today.

Income Disparity in France is nonetheless at a level far, far better than, say, the US. As shown here.
Click to expand...

The idea that the wealth taxes are behind some max exodus of the rich is largely a lie and Macron knows it:

https://www.thelocal.fr/20150807/are-taxes-behind-rise-in-exodus-of-rich-french

I'm sure he very much is regretting this decision made primarily at the behest of his friends, larger donors and lobbyists.
 
Surrealistik said:
The idea that the wealth taxes are behind some max exodus of the rich is largely a lie and Macron knows it:

https://www.thelocal.fr/20150807/are-taxes-behind-rise-in-exodus-of-rich-french

I'm sure he very much is regretting this decision made primarily at the behest of his friends, larger donors and lobbyists.
Click to expand...

I happen to believe THEY ARE. I have known some even in Monaco (which is a sovereign state) that have left as well.

Money goes where it is least tax, and that will not change until there is an international agreement to change it.

The US is the ONLY developed country that requires its compatriots to declare their taxes whilst abroad and (if their income is above $100K) they pay double taxation in Europe and the US!

Which is why a good-many Yanks have married "locals" and changed nationalities. If Obama thought he was going to get his hands on "more money" from fellow-Americans he got that one very wrong.

In fact, the French banks are now avoiding to recruit American customers. Too problematic and for too little - ever since the EU stoopidly accepted FATCA. (Which is unilateral since EU law stipulates that money earned in any other country for employment need not be reported to your home country. Or something like that.)

Nobody should be required to pay taxes in any other country except where either they earn it or keep it. And also a reason why - if you are a Yank - some British banks will take your money but not give any interest on it. In that manner, no report need be made to the US authorities. (Of course, THEY invest your money in interest-bearing debt and keep the returns.)

BFD, huh ... ?
 
Lafayette said:
I happen to believe THEY ARE. I have known some even in Monaco (which is a sovereign state) that have left as well.
Click to expand...

In the case of France the balance of the evidence seems to be otherwise; at the very least no compelling causal relationship can be drawn.


Moreover, US tax law is a loophole riddled joke and a mess in general, having been the product of countless decades of special interests and lobbying (to be clear, I don't think the American situation is better; it's definitely worse, and the US is a de facto plutocracy no matter which party is in power), but that's beside the point, and off-topic.
 
Last edited:
Lafayette said:
Oupps, you're right.

Here is the link intended from the UofCal study:
2DfGB.png


It shows that half the total Income generated is split evenly between two very different population groups.

Now, do you think it is right and proper that the upper TenPercenters should obtain the same percentage of Income (including capital gains) as the other 90%?

I don't ...
Click to expand...

It's a return to something like the historic (pre-WW2) norm for the US, before the 1945-75 period of unprecedented (and unnatural) US economic world dominance.
 
Jack Hays said:
It's a return to something like the historic (pre-WW2) norm for the US, before the 1945-75 period of unprecedented (and unnatural) US economic world dominance.
Click to expand...

One could say in the same way what happened (under Hollande, a Socialist prez) in France.

There are basic precepts/beliefs that remain inculcated in a country. The socialists have gone from a majority party (nominating the PM) to a distinctly minority party since the last feckless president they had (before Macron). Socialism in France is not going away because they lost the last national vote.

In a way, both the Left and the Right contribute with their varying weight (at any given moment) to a democracy. A great deal of the Left have become "middlers" because they are earning much better salaries than their parents. I suspect the same is happening in the US, but even moreso.

The question remains "Why is a socialist ethos so much more prevalent in Europe than the US?"

Because the prevalent ethos is the same in the US, just not on the Left but on the Right. And why? Because the economy in the US has grown further and faster than in Europe, and the single factor of having a great deal of money can change one's attitudes/outlook on life in general.

I'm going out on a long limb but I'd say that the reason is that one helluva lotta moulah ... corrupts people. They don't stop at "enough" because it is like a game that they want to keep winning.

Unfortunately economics in to like a game. Yes, there are winners but economic policy has a dictum. It goes like this: An economy will have a variety of accomplishment - from losers to ordinary to very good winners.

At its heart is though is the Inherent Economic Income Disparity over time between the most poor and the most rich?
 
Lafayette said:
One could say in the same way what happened (under Hollande, a Socialist prez) in France.

There are basic precepts/beliefs that remain inculcated in a country. The socialists have gone from a majority party (nominating the PM) to a distinctly minority party since the last feckless president they had (before Macron). Socialism in France is not going away because they lost the last national vote.

In a way, both the Left and the Right contribute with their varying weight (at any given moment) to a democracy. A great deal of the Left have become "middlers" because they are earning much better salaries than their parents. I suspect the same is happening in the US, but even moreso.

The question remains "Why is a socialist ethos so much more prevalent in Europe than the US?"

Because the prevalent ethos is the same in the US, just not on the Left but on the Right. And why? Because the economy in the US has grown further and faster than in Europe, and the single factor of having a great deal of money can change one's attitudes/outlook on life in general.

I'm going out on a long limb but I'd say that the reason is that one helluva lotta moulah ... corrupts people. They don't stop at "enough" because it is like a game that they want to keep winning.

Unfortunately economics in to like a game. Yes, there are winners but economic policy has a dictum. It goes like this: An economy will have a variety of accomplishment - from losers to ordinary to very good winners.

At its heart is though is the Inherent Economic Income Disparity over time between the most poor and the most rich?
Click to expand...

Not sure what your point is. Individualism is deeply rooted in American culture. I'd argue that it's not political except when either side, right or left, strays too far from individualism they lose.
 
ECONOMIC FAIRNESS

Jack Hays said:
Individualism is deeply rooted in American culture. I'd argue that it's not political except when either side, right or left, strays too far from individualism they lose.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. That does not make it right. Just Right.

You (singular) live in a market-economy that constitutes a lot of you (plural) consumers. That notion makes us not individuals but one giant collective of consumers. Aka, an "economy".

The only person on earth who is an "individualist" is someone like Robinson Crusoe who lived on a deserted island and provided for himself. Most people today stranded on a deserted island, would likely die of starvation.

As we live together in a society, we are all dependent upon one another for all that we have. Most importantly, a job in company the provides goods/services for others. Within which we pay taxes to support local, state and national governments who provide services.

None of that makes you an "individualist". Let's not be brainwashed with the idea that Socialism is the negation of individualism. (Communism, yes, was like that.) Social Democracies that exist today are not. Their financial systems are "capitalist", but their political outlook is that of a Social Democracy. Which means what?

This (from here): Social democracy is a political, social and economic ideology that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a liberal democratic polity and capitalist economy.

And what is meant by Social Justice? This: fairness in terms of the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges within a society.

Nonetheless, some think that notion is dead-wrong. They believe that one should have the intrinsic right to amass ridiculous amounts of money and taxation should allow it. And that notion was made a reality in America ever since JFK/LBJ started lowering upper-income taxation in the early 1960s and Reagan completed the drastic reductions. (See the history of US taxation levels in this info-graphic here.)

Economic Fairness is defined not as in communism - where everyone has more or less the same revenue - but where the distribution of income is equitable. Not equal, but fair and reasonable ...

PS: But what does income distribution look like in America today? Like this.
 
Lafayette said:
ECONOMIC FAIRNESS



Yes, I agree. That does not make it right. Just Right.

You (singular) live in a market-economy that constitutes a lot of you (plural) consumers. That notion makes us not individuals but one giant collective of consumers. Aka, an "economy".

The only person on earth who is an "individualist" is someone like Robinson Crusoe who lived on a deserted island and provided for himself. Most people today stranded on a deserted island, would likely die of starvation.

As we live together in a society, we are all dependent upon one another for all that we have. Most importantly, a job in company the provides goods/services for others. Within which we pay taxes to support local, state and national governments who provide services.

None of that makes you an "individualist". Let's not be brainwashed with the idea that Socialism is the negation of individualism. (Communism, yes, was like that.) Social Democracies that exist today are not. Their financial systems are "capitalist", but their political outlook is that of a Social Democracy. Which means what?

This (from here): Social democracy is a political, social and economic ideology that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a liberal democratic polity and capitalist economy.

And what is meant by Social Justice? This: fairness in terms of the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges within a society.

Nonetheless, some think that notion is dead-wrong. They believe that one should have the intrinsic right to amass ridiculous amounts of money and taxation should allow it. And that notion was made a reality in America ever since JFK/LBJ started lowering upper-income taxation in the early 1960s and Reagan completed the drastic reductions. (See the history of US taxation levels in this info-graphic here.)

Economic Fairness is defined not as in communism - where everyone has more or less the same revenue - but where the distribution of income is equitable. Not equal, but fair and reasonable ...

PS: But what does income distribution look like in America today? Like this.
Click to expand...

In a free society I don't think "economic fairness" is a meaningful concept.
The "individualism" in American culture has everything to do with the origins and history of the US, and not much at all with current conditions of life.
 
Lafayette said:
They believe that one should have the intrinsic right to amass ridiculous amounts of money and taxation should allow it.
Click to expand...

Agreed. 10% of American families own 74% of American wealth. America is increasingly resembling an oligarchy.
 
Surrealistik said:
I'm sure he very much is regretting this decision made primarily at the behest of his friends, larger donors and lobbyists.
Click to expand...

His largest base of donors (about 53% of the total benefactors) were from London. And another sizable proportion were from Belgium (displaced French tax-exiles).
 
Last edited:
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[h=1]Furious Greenpeace, Oxfam Suing the French Government Over Macron’s Carbon Tax Retreat[/h][FONT=&quot]Guest essay by Eric Worrall NGOS including Oxfam and Greenpeace are furious at President Macron’s frantic retreat from yellow vest protests against higher fuel taxes. 1.7 million people have signed a petition in favor of suing France over climate-change inaction By Annabelle Timsit in Paris December 27, 2018 More than 1.7 million people have signed…
Continue reading →
[/FONT]
 
Haven't the last two presidents (Sarkozy and Chirac) been charged with crimes? I remember reading something about French military support for the Rwandan Hutu Supremacists in the 1990's. And you had the Karachi Affair as well as Sarkozy getting millions for his presidential campaign from Muammar Gaddafi, and the last election was between Loony Marine le Pen and... this guy.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
Haven't the last two presidents (Sarkozy and Chirac) been charged with crimes? I remember reading something about French military support for the Rwandan Hutu Supremacists in the 1990's. And you had the Karachi Affair as well as Sarkozy getting millions for his presidential campaign from Muammar Gaddafi, and the last election was between Loony Marine le Pen and... this guy.
Click to expand...

Interesting that, although everyone is in favor of saving the planet (who wouldn't be?), when it comes down to hiking the price of fuel the ordinary people are not in favor.

Meanwhile the president who would never be distracted by petty selfish interests from his role as savior of Europe, has backed down on fuel prices because of street protests by French peasants!

Who would have thought! Macron, the investment banker marketed and hailed as centrist man of the people, turns out to be an investment banker whose policies helped the rich cosmopolitan elite and stuffed the ordinary French worker.

This is another crushing blow for pro European centrism - exposed yet again as a fraud against ordinary workers and small town / rural communities.
 
[FONT=&quot]Climate cash[/FONT]
[h=1]CNN Notices Climate Change Policies Hurt Poor People[/h][FONT=&quot]Guest essay by Eric Worrall Their prescription of course is more socialism. Why President Macron’s U-turn is a warning for climate leaders By Mark Lynas Updated 0921 GMT (1721 HKT) December 31, 2018 (CNN) The humiliation of President Emanuel Macron should be a cautionary tale for any world statesman or woman considering taking on the…
[/FONT]
 
[h=1]Macron’s Energy Transition[/h]Posted on 08 Jan 19 by GEOFF CHAMBERS • 7 Comments
The Anglo Saxon media continue to give a strangely muted coverage to the French Yellow Vest protests. A burning barricade by night with the cathedral of Notre Dame in the background looks impressive for five seconds on the evening news, but – violent protests in France – so what? Last Saturday a retired champion boxer … Continue reading →
 
Abbazorkzog said:
Haven't the last two presidents (Sarkozy and Chirac) been charged with crimes?
Click to expand...

Nearly right :)

Our last president was François Hollande - not charged with crimes, however much maligned with low popularity ratings during his term. I think history will be kinder to him and we will look back and see that he really wasn't that bad. A tad weak, but he did some good things IMHO.

Before him Sarko has been named in scandals such as the Clearstream affair, the Bettancourt affair and others but manages to get off, even though it all smells like a rat's fart. Not quite all over for him yet and I sincerely hope they nail something on him - arrogant basket (not the word I originally intended). Not holding my breath however.

Before him Chirac, who was charged but got off on ill health grounds. He apparently doesn't know if he's Arthur or Martha these days. He and vomit inducing wife Bernadette apparently spent millions unneccessarily while in office (fantastic book: Jean Montaldo "Chirac et les 40 Menteurs" - Chirac and the 40 Liars).

Herein lies the rub, it's not just French poor people but French middle class people who are sick of paying their taxes, doing the right thing, funding everything (the word "solidarité" you will here nowhere more frequently than in France), while the rich and powerful continue raking it in. Madame Chirac apparently spent 400€ a day on food from the official budget when hubby was Mayor of Paris. How does that sit with the single mum getting 1400€ a month while working full time? What's happening is the culmination of years of disconnect between the political élite and the ordinary people. Macron and his carbon tax were just the pin that pricked the boil. I don't believe this is necessarily even about Macron, who let's not forget even before this kicked off had already reduced a local tax, the "taxe d'habitation" and had already planned to abolish it next year, thus helping everybody's euros go further. Macron is now the scapegoat - yes he's had an arrogant style of government, but this isn't ALL about him.

I don't believe this disconnect is unique to France - I believe it's the same phenomenon that's led to Brits voting Brexit, Americans electing idiot Trump, Italians and Hungarians electing fascists. This is what had Armenians out in the streets in April, what has Hungarians out in the streets now. France is not unique in what's happening, but yes, they do like to see burning cars.

The immediate future is scary, but not just in France I'm afraid.
 
Urethra Franklin said:
Herein lies the rub, it's not just French poor people but French middle class people who are sick of paying their taxes, doing the right thing, funding everything (the word "solidarité" you will here nowhere more frequently than in France), while the rich and powerful continue raking it in. Madame Chirac apparently spent 400€ a day on food from the official budget when hubby was Mayor of Paris. How does that sit with the single mum getting 1400€ a month while working full time? What's happening is the culmination of years of disconnect between the political élite and the ordinary people. Macron and his carbon tax were just the pin that pricked the boil. I don't believe this is necessarily even about Macron, who let's not forget even before this kicked off had already reduced a local tax, the "taxe d'habitation" and had already planned to abolish it next year, thus helping everybody's euros go further. Macron is now the scapegoat - yes he's had an arrogant style of government, but this isn't ALL about him.
Click to expand...

That's almost exactly how I feel about Trump. The corporate media likes to obsess over him, due to the money it gets them. But looking at the big picture, the Trumps and Clintons - as just one example - have been friends for decades. And nobody ever talks anymore about how Bush's Iraq adventures were the most protested-against actions of a state in history (I don't know if they've yet been surpassed by the opposition to Trump, but I don't believe so).

I don't believe this disconnect is unique to France - I believe it's the same phenomenon that's led to Brits voting Brexit, Americans electing idiot Trump, Italians and Hungarians electing fascists. This is what had Armenians out in the streets in April, what has Hungarians out in the streets now. France is not unique in what's happening, but yes, they do like to see burning cars.
Click to expand...

Yep. Worldwide, people are starting to wake up to the fact that it doesn't matter if said elites are right-wing, left-wing, or centrist, they all have more in common with one another than they do with their constituents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom