French elections: Socialist Hollande wins - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Aman VII;35867143]If I was a rich person in France I'd almost contemplate moving. That is [I]way[/I] too much.[/QUOTE] Allot of Conservatives argue that that's what happens when you tax the rich, they move out of state or out of country, or find loopholes.

[QUOTE=The Baconator;35875859]Allot of Conservatives argue that that's what happens when you tax the rich, they move out of state or out of country, or find loopholes.[/QUOTE] What we need are statistics of the last time a Socialist was President. Under 14 years of Mitterand, did the super rich move out of France? There has to be information about it somewhere! We could also look up if the number of rich people increased when Reagan lowered taxes in the 1980s for the rich. My mom always likes to say her rich friends showed up to the USA to avoid paying French taxes.

[QUOTE=person11;35875618]The Government could put it to better use than the citizen, who would probably use it to make even more money. Do not give me any of that trickle-down bullcrap either. Plus, assuming that someone is making their money in efficient and ethical ways while working hard for it is way too general and does not at all show the reality of how the top 0.1% live. [editline]8th May 2012[/editline] So I just looked up some inflation figures, and One dollar today is equivalent to 0.12 1950 cents. That means that making One million dollars a year of our money would be 120000 dollars back then. And in 1950 the tax bracket for 100001 dollars was 89%. So it looks like even with Hollande's tax hike, taxes wouldn't be has high as before. Wait none of this makes sense since we are talking about France not the USA. Well I can still make the point that putting a 75% tax on an income of more than a million dollars a year would not be crazy in the United States.[/QUOTE] The taxes were officially that high, but nobody actually paid those rates, they escaped them with loopholes and other means.

Being taxed more than 50% just doesn't feel right.

[QUOTE=Kljunas;35875989]Being taxed more than 50% just doesn't feel right.[/QUOTE]And why not?

Because Taxation is basically theft. If taking 100% of someones labour wage is considered theft, at what percentage does it stop being theft? Sure most of the time taxpayers get services paid for by some of their taxes but what if they don't want those services? What if they don't want to pay for other peoples medical care, for example? Most of the time services paid for by taxpayers are run by large wasteful and inefficient government bureaucracies (they are spending money that they get regardless of whether they perform well or not) and paying a private provider would work out as better value if people were given the choice instead of forced to pay the state regardless.

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;35876119]Because Taxation is basically theft. If taking 100% of someones labour wage is considered theft, at what percentage does it stop being theft? Sure most of the time taxpayers get services paid for by some of their taxes but what if they don't want those services? What if they don't want to pay for other peoples medical care, for example? Most of the time services paid for by taxpayers are run by large wasteful and inefficient government bureaucracies (they are spending money that they get regardless of whether they perform well or not) and paying a private provider would work out as better value if people were given the choice instead of forced to pay the state regardless.[/QUOTE] Theft is the removal of goods without permission. Living and working in a country is a social contract. If you don't believe in the contract, you may leave at your own free will. You aren't forced to accept a countries laws and rules if you don't like them. You can simply emigrate. Most of the time? All of the time. You're saying it like the rich drive on private roads to business meetings, or they have a different electricity supply, or they drink different water from different pipelines, or that they don't own land. The idea that governments are largely wasteful is a ridiculous myth, how would a country function if half the money was 'wasted'? Unless you call public libraries and schools 'waste'

A social contract is not a contract unless it is agreed on by both parties. Simply being born in a country does not mean you accept the "social contract". Social contract? I didn't fucking sign shit. The electricity and water supplies are provided by various suppliers in my country. It wouldn't be a bad thing if roads were provided in a similar way in fact if they were I bet they would get fixed a whole lot faster than they do.

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;35876901]Simply being born in a country does not mean you accept the "social contract". [/QUOTE] being part of social society is acceptance of the social contract, same reason why murder is illegal.

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;35876901]A social contract is not a contract unless it is agreed on by both parties. Simply being born in a country does not mean you accept the "social contract". Social contract? I didn't fucking sign shit.[/QUOTE] You're a citizen of a country with laws and boundaries. You're expected to do x and y. If you don't like x and y, you can't say 'I refuse', such as fraud or murder or pay no taxes. Can you refuse to pay taxes because you 'didn't sign shit'?

I don't not kill people because it is against the law or in contradiction to some invisible retarded contract, I don't kill people because I have no need to and, in my opinion, it isn't a very nice thing to do.

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;35876962]I don't not kill people because it is against the law or in contradiction to some invisible retarded contract, I don't kill people because I have no need to and, in my opinion, it isn't a very nice thing to do.[/QUOTE] You're ignoring the question. Can you refuse a countries laws?

[QUOTE=MrEndangered;35876943]You're a citizen of a country with laws and boundaries. You're expected to do x and y. If you don't like x and y, you can't say 'I refuse', such as fraud or murder or pay no taxes. Can you refuse to pay taxes because you 'didn't sign shit'?[/QUOTE] Yes, actually. It's called not working a taxed job.

i didn't say "the social contract is why you don't kill people" i said "the social contract is why murder is illegal". please read

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;35876983]Yes, actually. It's called not working a taxed job.[/QUOTE] So you're just going to earn below minimum wage and live barely on the bread line just so you don't have to pay taxes? That's not flaunting the system, that's perfectly fine within the system. That's not illegal.

Murder could be "illegal" because anyone with authority (i.e. guns and means to enforce it) said so. It doesn't need any social contract...

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;35876983]Yes, actually. It's called not working a taxed job.[/QUOTE] you still pay VAT

[QUOTE=MrEndangered;35877012]So you're just going to earn below minimum wage and live barely on the bread line just so you don't have to pay taxes? That's not flaunting the system, that's perfectly fine within the system. That's not illegal.[/QUOTE] Theres these things called cash in hand and payment in kind :P [editline]8th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=thisispain;35877024]you still pay VAT[/QUOTE] Yeah unfortunately. Shame I have to fund shit I don't agree with but I kinda need to buy food.

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;35877017]Murder could be "illegal" because anyone with authority (i.e. guns and means to enforce it) said so. It doesn't need any social contract...[/QUOTE] A bank robber still has to answer to the countries laws. You can't live in a country freely and not comply with the law. It's called Social Contract Theory. [editline]8th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=JustExtreme;35877035]Yeah unfortunately. Shame I have to fund shit I don't agree with but I kinda need to buy food.[/QUOTE] Just move to Somalia. You'll like it there.

I'd prefer Switzerland to be honest. Their decentralization of power is to be admired even if taxation/theft is still rife there. I'd rather pay into a system where I actually have a say as opposed to the pretend one I supposedly have in Westminster.

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;35877035] Yeah unfortunately. Shame I have to fund shit I don't agree with but I kinda need to buy food.[/QUOTE] it also funds shit in order to bring that food there. food doesn't just grow on the shelf, it needs to be carried across by trucks which carry ingredients that may possibly come from other countries which are regulated by the government and processed in ports that are maintained by the government, carried across gigantic roads that need to be maintained, it arrives and gets processed and then checked by the FDA in order to maintain a safety standard bla bla bla

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;35877106]I'd prefer Switzerland to be honest. Their decentralization of power is to be admired even if taxation/theft is still rife there. I'd rather pay into a system where I actually have a say.[/QUOTE] Actually no, Somalia is much better. You have your own say in everything! Aslong as you have the bigger gun, the country is yours! Think how free you'll be.

[QUOTE=MrEndangered;35877156]Actually no, Somalia is much better. You have your own say in everything! Aslong as you have the bigger gun, the country is yours! Think how free you'll be.[/QUOTE] That is effectively how things work here too. The government has the big guns therefore the citizens must obey... The biggest gang has taken over and things have stabilised somewhat.

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;35877207]That is effectively how things work here too. The government has the big guns therefore the citizens must obey... The biggest gang has taken over and things have stabilised somewhat.[/QUOTE] A gang that builds roads, hospitals, puts out your fires, stops people beating you up, educates you, [I]lets you leave the gang for another anytime you wish[/I], checks your food is safe, gives you money when you're poor, puts money into research, provides power and water. I think you have a persecution complex, or read too many gutter press newspapers. Assuming you haven't packed your bags yet, you're under 18. You'll grow out of it kid, don't worry.

I'm 23 and I have my own accommodation :) A contract is a mutual agreement made voluntarily between two or more parties and "social contract theory" does not equate that. It's just a veiled threat. "do what the government says, or go to jail." I don't read newspapers because they are full of shit (like me, you probably think...)

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;35877332]I'm 23 and I have my own accommodation :) A contract is a mutual agreement made voluntarily between two or more parties and "social contract theory" does not equate that. It's just a veiled threat. "do what the government says, or go to jail." I don't read newspapers because they are full of shit (like me, you probably think...)[/QUOTE] No, I don't think that. I'd just like to know what you think is 'worth' paying for.

This thread took a turn for the stupid. Taxes are not immoral and need to be paid to assure the continuing functioning of the government and therefore society. It only makes sense that the rich should pay mare taxes depending on their income level, and that the larger the income, the larger the tax rate, hence a 75% tax rate for the super rich (I heard that 3000 people in France would be effected. That is it.).

[QUOTE=Ond kaja;35875856]To even out the income gaps between the rich and the poor.[/QUOTE] Theft and redistribution of successful people's money doesn't seem to be a good solution to income inequality. Profit is what motivates businesses to cut waste and inefficiency, keep expenses low and revenues high, and what has driven social, economic and technological progress. Reduce profit through absurdly high taxes and you will reduce the motivation to run an efficient business. Why? Because the money that would have been left over as profit from cutting inefficient expenses is going to be taxed heavily. The business owner has little reason not to say "fuck it, I'll just buy this equipment for my business even though I don't really need it" because if he doesn't buy it and keeps the money as profit, the profit will just be taxed away at some absurd rate anyway. Again, profit gives the business owner the incentive to cut wasteful spending and run the most efficient business possible.

[QUOTE=Noble;35877704]Theft and redistribution of successful people's money doesn't seem to be a good solution to income inequality. Profit is what motivates businesses to cut waste and inefficiency, keep expenses low and revenues high, and what has driven social, economic and technological progress. Reduce profit through absurdly high taxes and you will reduce the motivation to run an efficient business. Why? Because the money that would have been left over as profit from cutting inefficient expenses is going to be taxed heavily. The business owner has little reason not to say "fuck it, I'll just buy this equipment for my business even though I don't really need it" because if he doesn't buy it and keeps the money as profit, the profit will just be taxed away at some absurd rate anyway. Again, profit gives the business owner the incentive to cut wasteful spending and run the most efficient business possible.[/QUOTE]Sweet titty fucking Christ everything you just said is damned stupid. That's idiotic to think that anyone would rather make less money so that they are taxed less than make more money but be taxed more. They'll still be getting a higher income after taxes than if they earned less and were taxed less. If someone actually believes it is better for them to be taxed less and simultaneously make less money, then they are flat out fucking incompetent and most likely a danger to themselves and those around them. [editline]8th May 2012[/editline] There are not enough boxes in the world to express how stupid that idea is. [editline]8th May 2012[/editline] And quit with that bullshit idea that people are wealthy because they worked hard or they were successful. That's a flat out fucking myth. The simple fact is that most were just straight out lucky or had the right connections to people who could get them money. It has little to do with hard work, and more to do with who your family is and where you grew up and who you made friends with.

[QUOTE=Megafan;35869609]We were just as 'adjusted' to low taxes in 1916, yet in 1918 we raised the top rate to 77% from 13%. Really, your argument does not have a leg to stand on.[/QUOTE] We had a war going on. A flurry of patriotism changes someones view on taxes. If I was told my taxes were going to beat some bastards in Germany, then gladly would I pay up. If I was told by the government that it was to give the government more money and reduce debt, then many people would have more difficulty with that statement.