Welcome to PatsFans.com

Good News! "French court rejects 75 percent millionaires' tax"

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by PatriotsReign, Dec 29, 2012.

  1. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    193
    Ratings:
    +551 / 6 / -24

    #18 Jersey

    Thought this was a surprise for a country like France. Although the article does mention some citizens leaving France if the measure was passed.

    French court rejects 75 percent millionaires' tax

    French court rejects 75 percent millionaires' tax - Yahoo! Finance
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2012
  2. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,435
    Likes Received:
    319
    Ratings:
    +890 / 7 / -3

    Apparently this may only be a temporary setback for the loons in office. They've said they're going to rewrite the legislation so that it conforms to the courts objections, and eventually passes.

    On a sane note, can you imagine the ignorance, and outright lunacy, of implementing a 75% tax rate on income? If anyone involved is "shocked, stunned, or surprised" by the mass exodus of high income earners, they're complete and utter fools. I'd leave in a nano second if I made millions per year. If I were an actor, athlete, or whatever, I'd never, ever do work there. Unless there are some kind of quirks to who pays, can you imagine being a soccer player for example, like Zoltan Ibrahimovich playing for PSG (Paris pro team), making say $10 million euros per, and having to give 75% of everything over $1 million euros to the French government? That's outright insane. I'd never, ever play there. 75%!!!!!!! :eek:
     
  3. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,930
    Likes Received:
    301
    Ratings:
    +553 / 22 / -19

    From Roosevelt to Eisenhower our top tax bracket was over 90%. Under Kennedy, it was 70%. Obviously, if you look at our economic history, you would be hard pressed to make a case that in all the intervening years our economy suffered as a result of high taxes on the wealthy. Why anyone would see this setback as good news is beyond me, but then again Americans tend to worship wealth, celebrity, and other such nonsense. I suppose in the absence of kings, we can still worship mammon.
     
  4. Ilikehappyppl

    Ilikehappyppl 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,743
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Good News? lol glad your happy PR, maybe they'll let you pick up some of their crumbs...

    Its too bad it didn't pass, like Patters said, we did this in the US in the 1940's-1950's and it got us out of debt and we became the greatest economic powerhouse every created....

    I guess you don't like History do you PR? Because you and others are bound to repeat it....When the blind lead the blind they both fall into a ditch...
     
  5. Ilikehappyppl

    Ilikehappyppl 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,743
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Anyone is replaceable, don't let the door hit you on the way out....Cry cry cry cry, *****,*****,*****, moan,moan,moan....Poor rich people....I feel so bad for them!:bricks:
     
  6. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    193
    Ratings:
    +551 / 6 / -24

    #18 Jersey

    I think most of us worship FAIRNESS. No gov't should every get more of someone's income than the person earning it.

    To believe otherwise is nuts to me.

    You can't compare Roosevelt (depression days) or the golden age of American economy (Eisenhower) to today.

    Today, people will easily re-locate to a lower tax nation in heart-beat if we tax them at very high levels. And one can't blame them either.

    I think we have 2 issues going on simultaneously.

    1. What is a fair tax for each income level?

    2. People on government assistance often live at the same standards as an average American family earning the average income.

    So yes, wealthy Americans need to pay more taxes, I agree. But no family on gov't assistance should be living at the same standards as a working family.

    Otherwise, why put much effort into WORK?

    When Work Is Punished: The Tragedy Of America's Welfare State

    When Work Is Punished: The Tragedy Of America's Welfare State | ZeroHedge

    Also, from a 2 year study by the Heritage Foundation;

    No wonder why so many Americans want our wealthy to pay more! So Americans in poverty can live at the average standard of working Americans! Very, very sad....

    moan,moan,moan....Poor poor people....I feel so bad for them!:bricks:
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2012
  7. Ilikehappyppl

    Ilikehappyppl 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,743
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Life isn't fair, get over it and move on....If the world was fair people would get paid a fair wage, right?

    :)
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2012
  8. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    193
    Ratings:
    +551 / 6 / -24

    #18 Jersey

    No, if life was actually fair, people doing lowly jobs would make lowly wages.
     
  9. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,605
    Likes Received:
    752
    Ratings:
    +1,961 / 41 / -31

    #87 Jersey

    That 90% thing is all myth Patters.

    that was the tax rate for earnings over $200,000 back then which today = @ 2.5 million.

    Also taxes were paid on taxable income and not earned income.
    You could deduct everything back then ... even your spouses lunch.

    Overall without getting into boring statistics they paid around 40% back in the 40's.

    Historically we have paid @ 19.5% of GDP for taxes ... Hauser's Law.

    Hauser's law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Our long recession has pushed that number to a very low 15% in 2009.
    some disagree with Hauser but I think they are mostly saying the same thing as to the problem.

    So the tax cuts really have not paid off due to a variety of factors. IMO we need to get to at least the 21% level by increasing taxes on everyone earning over $50,000 for singles and $75,000 for married couples. make the increase progressive adding say .5% increase on the low end and raising up to a top tier of the + $500,000 people.

    All should pay more and we need to eliminate loopholes and tax havens as much as possible. We need to move away from a federalist system and start a national sales tax on everything except for food, clothing and medical expenses. That would include houses, cars, boats, planes and even services and vacations and golf and everything including peanuts on airplanes ... every dollar spent should be taxed and the high spenders (rich) would truly pay more.

    Also we need to move away from the tax cut myth which is all political ... it does not help in the long run.
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2012
  10. RI Patriots fan

    RI Patriots fan In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2012
    Messages:
    4,134
    Likes Received:
    115
    Ratings:
    +306 / 14 / -25


    Um.....the economy suffered drastically during the FDR years with high taxes. Just ask FDR's Secretary of the Treasury....he was beyond worried that business growth was very very poor.
     
  11. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,435
    Likes Received:
    319
    Ratings:
    +890 / 7 / -3

    This is why we're really doomed, or in the situation we're in. People either aren't informed, but speak as if they are, or they are informed, but intentionally choose to be disengenuous. That 90% rate was paid by virtually no one, if not no one, and the facts behind it are irrelevent and unapplicable in the 21st century.


    Billy Madison - Ultimate Insult (Academic Decathlon) - YouTube

    Facts and reality are irrelevent to the ignorant and disengenuous among us.

    At first I really liked the idea of a consumption tax. I'd only support one if income taxes were elimated as part of it's implementation. I would never, ever support the existence of an income tax, and a national sales tax. It's one or the other, not both.
     
  12. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    193
    Ratings:
    +551 / 6 / -24

    #18 Jersey

    I award you no points and may God have mercy on your soul dude;)
     
  13. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,930
    Likes Received:
    301
    Ratings:
    +553 / 22 / -19

    Could you find a more biased source than the conservative Heritage foundation? Of course, the typical poor family has a car because they often live in rural areas. In cities, they do not typically have cars and when they do, they use their cars selectively because of the costs. And of course, poor people have such "luxuries" as air conditioning, and Wii (usually used). Poor people get gifts from family, find cheap things at thrift stores, save up when they can to buy things that are very important to them, and poor people are more often than not are working people, who may have part-time work at minimum wage, and cannot get better jobs. The Heritage Foundations study is such a fraud. People may have larger homes than in Europe, but has nothing to do with them living in the lap of luxury. I have a 900 sq foot condo in a great area. If I wanted to move out of Cambridge, I could sell it and buy a 3500 sq. foot home in Chelsea. with money left over.

    I think you have to get over the idea that life is fair. It's not. Some people are just luckier than others. Taxes are not designed for fairness, they are designed to address all the difficult challenges a nation faces. In an ideal world, there would be no taxes at all, but in a world like ours, we need taxes. You can disagree with the poor parent who buys his kid a used Wii or who buys a $600 car to try to find work, but how much do you really think we can cut from services for poor people? In the meantime, if the government needs more money right or wrong, let it turn to those who have benefitted most from the government, namely the wealthy. If it was not for our laws and system of government, they probably would not be as wealthy.
     
  14. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    193
    Ratings:
    +551 / 6 / -24

    #18 Jersey

    The original facts I posted were not from the HF. It was factual.

    So do you agree that no one on gov't assistance should live at the same standard of the average American working family or not?
     
  15. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,930
    Likes Received:
    301
    Ratings:
    +553 / 22 / -19

    Yes, in general I agree. As I've always said, we should have workfare, not welfare, because I believe that 95% of the really poor would rather work than get aid. The problem, though, with workfare, is that it's far more costly than handouts.
     
  16. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    21,354
    Likes Received:
    470
    Ratings:
    +1,018 / 15 / -8

    Not me, I'd rather get lai... oh. You said aid.

    In any event, I think this is fantastic news, because I am a French millionaire!

    Oh wait no I'm not... I guess you guys are...


    PFnV
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>