Oulah ... Mwouais!
Be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater ... Pulling the ambulance is good, it's already done hahaha
I am of the opinion that Holland's advances are rather soft, they are very much in phase with the liberal system, but they are not zero.
I think he is missing his date with history by trying to adopt an arbitrator position, but by that he is surely a chic guy in comparison to the outgoing (if that is we can compare them, hahahahah). But for the moment, what we can blame him for - and it's not as much given the real economic situation - so it's not much, and I would not like to be in his place!
First, this is not a NEW tax, it was a tax that had been concocted by the right! So this thread - which surely starts from the good feeling of seeing things happen - is in fact a process of intention (involuntary or not). Because everyone knows that when it comes to new taxes, they could not be implemented in six months rather ... It has to go through the legislative 'Spa ....
To add a little nuance, this is what Nicolas Hulot says:
Blog of Nicolas Hulot, president of the Nicolas Hulot Foundation for nature and man and Luc Lamprière, managing director of Oxfam France in the newspaper Le Monde, on 01.08.2012/13/50 at XNUMX:XNUMX p.m. wrote:Financial transaction tax revenues must go back to development
On August 1, the tax on financial transactions, voted by the right and whose rate has been doubled by the left, entered into force. According to estimates, it should bring in nearly 1,6 billion euros per year, or 0,4% of France's budget. Simple drop of water in the state budget, the symbolic significance of this measure is very strong in this era of budgetary turmoil. But this device is only a taste of what a real transaction tax could be across France, and hopefully European. It only skims the work of an international tax system which remains to be opened and will have to relate to other subjects such as carbon taxation. Far from limiting the excesses of finance, the French tax, riddled with exemptions, does not affect any of the most speculative activities, such as derivatives. It will therefore yield eight times less than what is possible.
European governments, led by France, admit this weakness. François Hollande has promised not to stop there: the change of scale, he says, will take place, with a "real" European tax on financial transactions. In fact, at the last European summit, a coalition of pioneer countries, including France and Germany, pledged to do so by the end of 2012. Finally, we would be tempted to say! After decades of fierce struggles around the Tobin tax and then with the idea of a "Robin Hood tax", intended to finance the fight against poverty, disease, poor development, and climate change, last year on the G20 agenda by France.
In this period of crisis, the new French tax is therefore more than a symbol, it is a test that engages the future both on the credibility of the government's international positions and on our collective response to the challenges of the planet. Because France is not at its first about-face. Already Nicolas Sarkozy, by allocating the too meager resources of this tax to the absorption of the French debt, had renounced the commitment he had made at the G20 in Cannes. Since then, François Hollande and the government, faced with the same resistance from Bercy, also maintain an ambiguity on the subject which must be resolved. Of course, the president said in Rio that "a large part" of the transaction tax should benefit development. However, nothing seems certain: according to Laurent Fabius, the government would only plan to allocate 10% of French tax revenue to development. Such a figure would be an unacceptable setback. Because France is one of those, with an astonishing consensus from right to left on the political spectrum, who, at least in speeches, constantly remind the world of its commitments to solidarity. France is one of the countries which advocate a target of 0,7% of gross national income intended for official development assistance; in Copenhagen, it largely supported the commitment to devote 100 billion dollars by 2020 to the fight against climate change. Today, none of these commitments are being kept.
The needs are enormous. One in six human beings lives below the poverty level, one in seven is hungry. Climate change darkens this picture: for people in developing countries, climate change is not a prediction, it is a reality in which the most vulnerable are the least responsible. If an extreme climatic event causes an average of 23 deaths in a rich country, in the least developed countries, that number is 1. Even in the face of the outbursts of nature, the injustice of poverty divides humanity!
If the objective of containing our deficits is laudable, imperative, we should not choose between two debts: that contracted with financial actors who now speculate on the bankruptcy of the euro, and that which we have accumulated for centuries with the countries of the South, by plundering their resources, disregarding the serious pandemics that hit them and causing climate change from which the poorest suffer.
Of course, it is not a question with the micro-tax which enters into force for our country of meeting these challenges alone. But if, already, by identifying the additional expenditure which it will finance to contribute to it, we prove that it is possible and necessary, especially in times of crisis, not to give up this ambition, a considerable step will have been taken. To do otherwise would be to create a dangerous precedent, the consequences of which, unfortunately, can be predicted for financing the real priorities of human development and the climate, which will be sacrificed only at our own risk.
If we reason according to the ambient paradigm: as long as such taxes are not globalized (at least they should at least be applied on a European scale), they will only serve to ruin the competitiveness of the countries which apply them ...
And I would not want us to get the wrong target either. The world economic war which takes place before our eyes, is that launched by the Americans against the whole world .... And mainly Europe.
I say that for those who do not know where the missiles come from !!!
(
It's a metaphor huh, but barely ...)
