Small fable on taxes in France

[fc89]

Hello,

Chazelle wrote:

pretty fable. "in any case long live France" with little nicola and her friends

PRETTY FABLE? but, she is horrible
In any case I felt well the beginning of the process, + 800Euros increase, all taxes combined, while my salary has dropped for 2 years.

A+

[crispus]

It all depends on how you present it, forgetting "annoying details" ...

I already read this fable on another forum and proposed my epilogue:
____________

The barman now refusing to serve them, the 9 friends go to the local supermarket to buy a pack of beer (I'll let you calculate the distribution of the bill ...)

After a while the bartender realizes that he is no longer selling his stock and is on the verge of bankruptcy. He is forced to lower his prices. His wholesaler finding the same thing in several bars, must also revise his margin downward.

In the end the 9 men realize that they have the means to return to the bar, and tell themselves that ultimately the 10th was not a real friend ...

But the 9 being no better than the 10th, it's a safe bet that the cycle will start again and that one day they will drink each on their own.
________

The "rich" does not work 50 times more than the others: his wealth he owes it to the exploitation of the 9 others (or more): employment (even slavery for the "poorest"), collection of rents (sometimes indecent) , loans (even usury) ... It does not generate growth by itself, it sparks its money in circuits essentially outside the concerns of its "brothers": casino, unnecessary luxury, investments abroad ... For For example, we make a great deal of an emir who buys an airbus, which remains little compared to the number of units actually allocated to passenger transport.

The difficulty is that, being at the top of the pyramid, the well-off refuses to pass for a "parasite". It's a bit like the mistletoe claiming to be of service to the oak, complaining in addition to being surrounded by acorns

But hey, we must not kid ourselves, man is so made that each "floor" of the pyramid has the same contemptuous attitude towards the "lower" levels, and secretly aspires to access the top level.

We live in a society of injustice, where exchanges are based on the principle of TPMG (Tout Pour Ma Gu ... e): the price of products and services is not based on criteria of equity, but on the principle "how much can I extract from the customer without killing him?". But by dint of mowing, it does not grow back and it is the recession.

Of course, in the event of a crisis, the wealthy will be the first to leave, for fear of paying the bill, but will they weaken the economy that much? There will be painful readjustments, but this will only affect the fringe of the population working in luxury goods or expensive hobbies. After a while the basic necessities will cost less and the superfluous will be non-existent, that's all.

Alas my scenario is ideal, because in practice "one" will rather designate an "enemy" responsible for the "crisis", on which one will make war to "revive the economy"

Regarding taxes, we easily forget that there are a multitude of tax loopholes that allow you not to pay. Only the "rich" the most civic or the "stupid", depending on the point of view, allow themselves to be taxed to the maximum. In practice as long as our "rich" has Mafia tendencies, the bartender's rebate would be 50% and would go directly into the pocket of this 10th man without the knowledge of the 9 others ...

The poorest are the most united, paying "confiscatory" taxes (the ugly word), ie those from which the taxpayer cannot escape: VAT, TIPP (or TIC), local taxes ...
At the same time, the "rich" complained but bought duty free, hunted down tax credits and lived in a historic monument, for example.
Incidentally, income tax pays so little that our president wants to remove it!

Long before the populist declarations of Minister of Finance Sarkozy, a certain Alain Madelin disembarking in Bercy, had declared that he did not accept the fact that some of the greatest fortunes of France are offering full-time tax advisers so as not to pay a dime in taxes. It was replaced as dry

In practice, it is the middle class, that which has sufficient income to be taxed, but insufficient to take advantage of tax loopholes, which pays for the rest of the population. But she can't complain, she's lucky not to be "poor" ...

In short, what distorts the game in our perfect world is that the communist ideal comes up against human greed: suddenly
"the notion of sharing only interests those who have nothing".

And that's a shame...

[Capt_Maloche]

Nice your analysis, but oh how subjective

True equality is one where everyone pays the same price, and where the salary corresponds to a time worked, where intelligence is seen only as a gift that must be used in the service of others

It is pure communism, in all its good, but does not necessarily value the efforts invested by the workers: example, between a leaf collector and a researcher (who really seeks and who must train all his life in addition to his job)

But now, certain decisions, certain trades have different financial impacts

So we come to the value of the work and the position of many business leaders who have not hesitated to sometimes sacrifice their family life, their property in mortgages, etc. Should they share their success equitably? their employees are certainly part of it, but what percentage? and their failures, can they share them?

so good luck to value the work of a psychiatrist , a known or unknown artist, a university professor or a teacher

Does the training have to be remunerated for the whole life of a worker when it is often the company (our parents) which financed it?

I'm playing devil's advocate, on purpose

Frankly, our system, very complex, very corrupt, is not ideal, but we can get out of it if we want to
AHH, obviously, it requires a little personal investment
you have to work in the RER instead of playing the game boy or playing Soduku, learning in the evening instead of watching debilitating series that democratize violence

but no, the Frenchman is undoubtedly lazy for that, so he waits for others to do it for him, yes but who?

we can continue to train, even if we missed his studies to claim better positions (obviously, you still have to have something to sell anyway, a skill) and a skill is acquired on the ground, in shit is sometimes hard and you should not give up at the first difficulty

I could make a book, too long to write, this is a discussion for a business lunch

[Capt_Maloche]

crispus, when do we have lunch together?

[crispus]

crispus, when do we have lunch together?

It would be my pleasure, actually I prefer to have lunch, there are lessulterior motives

Completely agree on the subjective side. I stayed in the fable, to point out irreconcilable points of view. I refute the idea that the poorest drink every night by eye. If they have no money, they can help others.

Regarding the tax and its "fair" distribution:

Tax fraud is a national sport, earning more on the backs of its citizens and the state is a major concern. Some squander pennies, others billions, bad faith is the same.

Why complain about the little service rendered by the state when it is deprived of means? But also the weakness of growth when the prices of essential products (food, housing ...) are unrelated to customers' incomes?

Rather, under the pretext of fairness, tax reforms have widened the gap between those who know how to take advantage of the system and those who suffer from it. A single scale (eg: 5%) without exemptions (allowances, ...) with deduction at source (before the citizen has "eaten" it), would probably bring more to the state. In addition that would make useless many civil servants of the Public Treasury and other "tax advisers" ... We could mobilize their skills for more useful things.

What I wanted to emphasize is that for retail sales prices must adapt to buyers' incomes. Otherwise the system will seize up.

The drama of our "modern" society is that it invented credit to virtually push back the limits of solvency: "you have no money, but you can buy!".

But debt only makes sense if it is used to build the future (eg research). Consumer credit is the rope that will hang our economy, as are discovering the Americans with their crisis due to mortgage credit ... It's a bit HS but I wanted to clarify my point of view.

I leave you, I must have lunch ... Bon appétit!

[Capt_Maloche]

No, it's not off topic, on the contrary
we are right in the middle

I like your little links , but I thought rather "take you" to lunch

Bon appétit!

[bob_isat]

Hi Christopher,

What I understand from your fable is that we must not tax the wealthy too much or they will go away ...

This is a very fashionable consideration:

Under the guise of "modernism", we come back to the principle of tax progressivity, and more broadly of solidarity in short, the values ​​of equality and fraternity ...

Unless I misunderstood?

[jean63]

All your explanations are very interesting, but anyway, the minimum is to be able to eat, find accommodation, heat in winter .... and even protect yourself from excessive heat in summer.

it's called vital functions.

People who are at the limit of survival stage do not ask all these questions about taxes.

After that, there are discussions of the rich (of which we are part since we are warm in front of our PC, well connected to the internet) ... how we share the cake ... etc. The fall of the Berlin Wall + the entry of the Chinese and Indians and other hard labor in the great global sharing of work and money, allow those who want and know how to exploit their neighbor, to do so shamelessly and to go 'hide' your money where it is most interesting.

The former bosses of French companies and who loved their country would never have had the idea of ​​going abroad, but in today's world, the nation no longer matters, the only thing that matters is earning the most money possible. That said, the pressure from shareholders who demand more and more dividends is not for nothing in this escalation.

In France we want butter and the money of butter, nobody wants to give up their "privileges" (relative despite everything) acquired by union struggles since 1945.

At the level of France even the socialist deputy Emmanuelli, had admitted paying 0 income taxes thanks to the tax loopholes cited by crispus =>

Regarding taxes, we easily forget that there are a multitude of tax loopholes that allow you not to pay. Only the most civic "rich" or the "stupidest", depending on your point of view, allow themselves to be taxed to the maximum.

[bpval]

Hopla

We feel the wise

I will tend to think like you

But wisdom has not touched me yet, I have not yet stored my sixty eight, however they are starting to get stuck

Hello

[Christophe]

Unless I misunderstood?

No, you understood that, but not that ... the second point which is understood is that without the taxes of the richest, the poor pay more ...