|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
posted May 08, 2012 03:31 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Isolation and intolerance will have the same results as incest... Retarded children. (you can quote me)
Lets apply for the great of philosphical discussion method: Whoever fronts a claim that is greater than nothing must provide reasoning or evidence for it.
____________
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 11:01 AM |
|
Edited by xerox at 11:03, 08 May 2012.
|
|
The problem is that if you are a country that has a huge immigration from countries such as Somalia and Afghanistan, then the people there are usually uneducated and poor. They are then expected to come to a super modern country and adapt to that, learn a completly alien language and compete on a labour market where all other people are educated and aren't analphabetic. Obviously that creates extremly high unemployment numbers among these people and leads to a massive segregation. And segregation has a LOT of negative consequences that can be seen everywhere. Increased crime rates, larger unemployment and more kids failing elementary school is caused by it.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 11:02 AM |
|
|
Quote:
.Immigrants exist in European countries because they are explotable. Uneducated,unqualified. They are cheap.
On the other hand,somebody with a degree is unattractive.
A few countries as Canada or Switzerland practice the elitism based immigration, you can't establish in those areas without serious diplomas-or specific required jobs-. Myself I tried to immigrate to Canada when I still was a student, rejected.
The idea that an immigrant is cheap by definition is no more true since slavery abolition, legally he has to be payed exactly as a native, no matter his degree of education. He will also be offered free training for one or another manual job. His kids will have access to free of charge school. Free of charge for him, but expensive for the state, in other words- tax payers.
If certain jobs are not accepted by natives but only by immigrants, the only guilty is a defective and way too generous welfare system, which, despite the global crisis, ensures for too long periods high incomes from thin air.
Other countries as Israel practice a strict racial based immigration, while no one is shocked. So, Israel can ad-aeternam justify this by its limited size while Europe is supposed to have infinite capacities? When problems constantly raise, among with far right rising, the logical conclusion should be that this capacity was overwrought.
Quote:
so, what did Hollande promised that makes them so happy?
The main difference between a french and an americain or german:
Americain/german: "what can I do to have bigger income?"
French: "why he has bigger income than me?"
So, all he had to do was to promise that rich will be stolen taxed at 75%. The sufferance of a few is enough to make happy 60 millions. He did not need to be a fine psychologist for that, the weird connection between french and money is world known.
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 03:24 PM |
|
|
Quote:
The problem is that if you are a country that has a huge immigration from countries such as Somalia and Afghanistan, then the people there are usually uneducated and poor. They are then expected to come to a super modern country and adapt to that, learn a completly alien language and compete on a labour market where all other people are educated and aren't analphabetic. Obviously that creates extremly high unemployment numbers among these people and leads to a massive segregation. And segregation has a LOT of negative consequences that can be seen everywhere. Increased crime rates, larger unemployment and more kids failing elementary school is caused by it.
The problem is a lot more complicated than that, because of what is written here: The only assumption is immigration contra unemployment. Its not that simple. First rule of the job marked: Only X% can have jobs based on the economies conjucture/speed/activity. In a period of high conjucture there is usually one trend: Only the speculators or people who are inbeetween jobs are counted as unemployed.
Now... we are into the period of recovery from a economic crisi/partial collapse. That means that there is more people than jobs, because the economy just happens to work like that, and what happens is that to filter out you only hire the most qualified people. Ergo, the less qualified will always not get hired. Low conjucture just forces people to fight in a forced ratrace where the least qualified will always not get jobs. Ergo: "You need to compete more to get hired" is basically a lie during a low conjucture period, because unless the economy recovers there is no chance of aquirering a job for the least qualified(and in periods of hard to get jobs, people automatically start getting higher and higher education as a result, just making a current trend more obvious).
The only thing immigration add is just more people who are by the majority not educated in the language. Some of them has more than enough work experience from their home country, other did not. The lack of language is their barrier, education is only a problem for their kids. The low conjucture only makes the problem visible. Only a minority will get a job, IF the economy is in that much of a shamble.
The next thing that can be discussed is then: How much impact does the various economic schools and goverments have on the economy and how far it can fall into shambles? But that is derail.
The point is: Immigration only makes that problem worse, but in the long run that it not a problem nor a issue. Its just a populistic and short term way of getting people to start critizing immigration.
Look at the problems instead: Social segregation and counter culture of the uneducated and left behind.
All one needs to do is to point to Malmø and say: "There is a problem in Malmø. This is caused by series of ignored immigration problems, shall we accept that things can get this bad on other Scandinavia citites?".
____________
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 03:43 PM |
|
|
Quote:
So, all he had to do was to promise that rich will be stolen taxed at 75%.
Can't see a problem with the idea itself, the rich are under-taxed pretty much everywhere in the capitalistic world. I highly doubt the execution though.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 04:55 PM |
|
|
Hollande explains it as a morality problem. I also see a morality problem taxing so high someone who worked hard (few are born rich), take from, and give to many not working at all. Just in case, Obama recently proposed to tax 30% for people earning more than 1 million. Hollande wants 75% for same category, his slogan being "I don't like rich people".
"Antipathy for the rich is widespread in France, where wealth is meant to be discreet and climbing the social ladder to build yourself a mansion isn't a common narrative.
Hollande himself once famously declared "I do not like the rich" — a statement that only boosted his political standing among those who think wealth should be redistributed instead of accumulated.
Following his 75-percent tax announcement, front pages treated the rich like some strange, migrating species, declaring that they would decamp to Belgium if the tax was put in place. "
READ about
Last detail: Hollande earned 400 000 euros/year before being elected. How funny.
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 05:08 PM |
|
|
|
The perception that the rich are hard-working individuals who have achieved everything on their own is cute as a baby child and just as naive. Nobody achieves anything on his own in a social environment, even if the means are completely legal, moral or whatever righteously-sounding word you prefer and usually "moral" and "rich" don't go hand in hand. So the idealism aside, taxing the rich more than the... less rich is economically sound but politically unachievable simply because the former have too much power. In the current format of the society that is.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 05:12 PM |
|
|
|
The truth may be somewhere in the middle. The perception that rich are rich because doubtful morality-or they don't deserve it at all- is also triggered by frustration and jalousie.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 05:14 PM |
|
|
Quote:
someone who worked hard (few are born rich)
Honestly, hard work is good for the States, Germany, France. When yoiu live in a country where the average wage is 400$ you can work as much as you want, but you ain't getting rich that way. You'll barely make it to the end of the month (aka majority of Poles).
I am against socialism however, it sucks even more.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 05:18 PM |
|
|
Quote:
The truth may be somewhere in the middle. The perception that rich are rich because doubtful morality-or they don't deserve it at all- is also triggered by frustration and jalousie.
There are hard working individuals who succeed because of their talent, brains, etc. but my point is that they never succeed alone, in vacuum. And of course there are robbers (and worse) masked as businessmen. It's immaterial to talk about morality in the economy when the aim should be efficiency.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 05:23 PM |
|
|
Talent, being in the right place at the right time, perception, intelligence, having cash on start, having friends in profitable places
all of those are more important than hard work on the path to being on an adequate level of life
Unless you live in the States or other rich countries where you can live a good life without talent due to average wage being actually very high.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 06:07 PM |
|
Edited by fauch at 18:07, 08 May 2012.
|
Quote:
So, all he had to do was to promise that rich will be stolen taxed at 75%. The sufferance of a few is enough to make happy 60 millions. He did not need to be a fine psychologist for that, the weird connection between french and money is world known.
beyond one million euros per year. but seriously, people are so short-sighted.
Quote:
Other countries as Israel practice a strict racial based immigration, while no one is shocked. So, Israel can ad-aeternam justify this by its limited size while Europe is supposed to have infinite capacities? When problems constantly raise, among with far right rising, the logical conclusion should be that this capacity was overwrought
you don't want to make israel unhappy
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 07:58 PM |
|
|
If you literally mean the rich achieved what they have by themselves, it's not true. No one person is capable of creating everything some rich person has - for example, Bill Gates could not have built his own mansion. But when people say the rich made it "by themselves", they don't mean "in isolation", they mean "without the use of force or begging for a handout". Many among them got rich by doing something that other people were willing to pay for - they got rich through voluntary exchange. For all practical purposes, that's getting rich "by themselves".
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 08:37 PM |
|
|
Being taxed at 75% means every day you work, from the 1st of January to the 31th of September, 24h/24h, all you earn is redistributed to people you don't even know. Why would rich people want to live in such place? They have the opportunity to move elsewhere, and they already warned they will. In the end you will get less income and employ.
It was a purely political and opportunist decision, destinate to unseat Sarkozy and feed with low/medium classes anger and frustration. Since 1960, there were several socialists governments, and they got the idea only now?
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 09:15 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Being taxed at 75% means every day you work, from the 1st of January to the 31th of September, 24h/24h, all you earn is redistributed to people you don't even know. Why would rich people want to live in such place?
They wouldn't. It's the fundamental flaw of such systems, the idea that revenue is directly proportional to tax rate.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 09:23 PM |
|
|
That's why socialism is garbage. If you actually gave that 30-75% tax money to people, they wouldn't need that "free" (lol, yeah) childcare, retirement rent and medical care as that cash would easily afford all of that, even for the poorest. in Poland even the poorest guy pays around 50% of his money in taxes of various form - and most of that fuels and army of bureaucrats that manage the money redistribution. Talk about uber inefficiency.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 09:35 PM |
|
|
Then again, I assume the tax scheme is still incremental. 75% of anything above 1 million is still massive earnings under 1 million, and its still 250k per 1 million earned. Which is still 10 times more than a yearly wage.
Secondly, if you have a neighborhood and associates, why leave? You have a nice house, and all that. Rich flight requires that the rich actually don't have enough things they just can't leave.
____________
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 10:43 PM |
|
|
I have a very close family member who earns over 10 000 euros a month, i'm pretty sure he would hate it if 75% of that was taxed away.
If lots of corporations would flee the country like that, then i'm sure a "rich tax" that high wouldn't be worth it.
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 10:49 PM |
|
|
|
75% is an overkill, I doubt that even half of that is realistic but allowing hundreds, even thousands of percents of profit go to the people who "honestly earned it" and to nobody else is even more moronic than taking most of it and re-distributing it among the rest of the society. Face it - if robbery due to greed is considered normal, then robbery for welfare purposes should be normal as well - the difference is that in the first case the robbers are private entities and in the second - the state. The other difference is that in the second case more people benefit from the robbery. Which of these two is achievable is another matter.
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted May 08, 2012 11:02 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I have a very close family member who earns over 10 000 euros a month, i'm pretty sure he would hate it if 75% of that was taxed away.
If lots of corporations would flee the country like that, then i'm sure a "rich tax" that high wouldn't be worth it.
Why don't you understand how incremental tax works?
____________
|
|
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
