510
submitted 1 month ago by Beaver@lemmy.ca to c/politics@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] moody@lemmings.world 77 points 1 month ago

Tax the rich and lower the retirement age that was just recently raised. Seems like a good plan to me.

I'm curious why they chose €400k as the top bracket. Is that low or high for such a steep tax rate? I'm not rich enough to know anything about this.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 40 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

You have to remember in Western countries it's usually progressive brackets. So they're paying 90 percent on anything past 400,000. You never have a net loss to taxes just for making more money in such a system.

[-] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 month ago

Technically, yes. However there are circumstances some places in the lower brackets where making more can disqualify you from welfare benefits. In those circumstances, an increase which is too small to compensate for the loss of benefits would be, effectively, a net loss.

Obviously though, that's not really an issue at the 400k bracket.

[-] Obi@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 month ago

And that's a big thing in France I think. I heard many talks about how it's better to be on SMIC (minimum salary) so you get all the benefits, and that for it to be worth it you need to bump up quite a bit higher in salary. I don't have any numbers to show or anything though so take it with a grain of salt.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago
[-] mryessir 21 points 1 month ago

Just assuming but people earning 400k are still working but living from the interest. Also 400k and having a few children may result in a good, but rich life.

I would also assume that their math pointed them there.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Lawyers and doctors can make that much, so they want to go just above that.

And anything above that really is excessive.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] DessertStorms@lemmy.blahaj.zone 66 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Good start.

The rich (and those licking their boots, even in these comments) would be well served to remember where the phrase "eat the rich" originates, and what the French (as should we all) do to those in power when they refuse to give up that power voluntarily.

[-] ObsidianZed@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

You can go ahead and at least put the full quote, because I just love it so much.

"When the people shall have nothing more to eat, they will eat the rich."

[-] vga@sopuli.xyz -4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Do you remember how all of their revolutions ended up? My personal favourite is the one that led to Napoleon.

[-] Beaver@lemmy.ca 47 points 1 month ago

The corporations need to be taxed heavily

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 37 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Why are you not putting the URL in the URL field? That will trigger the metadata to be pulled / federated which often includes a summary/description of the linked content.

[-] Beaver@lemmy.ca 22 points 1 month ago

I’m using a mobile client called mlem. That must be why the links are coming out weird.

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Ah. Haven't used Mlem, but I've heard of it. Weird limitation for a client to have, though.

[-] solarbabies@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago
[-] Beaver@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

I haven’t as I don’t think that’s available for iPhone

[-] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 1 month ago

im just glad for once that its actually a socialist left coalition that isn't transphobic. those are rare.

[-] Beaver@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 month ago

Yay, so they're much better than Labour.

[-] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Man, the french are going to need a wall for the amount of lefty americans who will be claiming political asylum.

[-] BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

Not going to happen though. While the left came first they still are not a majority. They hold 180 seats, which is less than 1/3 of the 577. No one really won the election.

Its really deadlock and all 3 groups will struggle to work together as none want the blame for the mess that will be split gjvernment, and all want to position themselves as the solution, win the presidency and/or next set of legislative elections.

So there is no way the centre or right will vote in a 90% tax on the rich. It'll be a struggle to even get a basic budget passed.

[-] Chocrates@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago

That's just how parliaments work. The Left has more pull than usual so they are announcing their policy goals to anchor their allies. They won't get any of what they want in full but now they have to work with their partners in government to get legislation done. I have no idea if the centrists and the right party are as obstructionist as the American GOP though, or if France's parliament has any levers to prevent outright obstruction

[-] Chocrates@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

How do you like Ground news?

[-] Beaver@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 month ago

I’m likening it a lot as it gives a perspective of who is behind my news.

[-] PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

No OP, but I've been using it for a bit now, and while it's not perfect, it does make it really easy to read news from other parts of the world and to look into the background of various outlets. It makes it easy to get around pay walls and article limits and It's also, like, $10 a year... and it's pretty easy to get a "1 dollar for a year sub" promo code from any random politics YouTuber. It's been a decent way to keep me from just defaulting to Reuters and AP instead of reading other outlets, which I would say is it's best feature for me.

[-] JimmyMcGill@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Does it have a nice feed with the latest news around the world and can you actually read the news there? I thought it was more of a news aggregator/comparison tool and I’m afraid that some news will be behind another pay wall or in some other website.

Lastly if you have one of those codes (maybe one that benefits you I can have a look). For 1$ a year I can give a try myself.

[-] crystalmerchant@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago
[-] Klnsfw@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 1 month ago

Indeed, it's the marginal taxe rate on your incomes. The left wing coalition wants to add 4 new brackets to the 5 existing ones. 90% would be applied to the next euros you earn after €400,000.

[-] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago

This is HORRIBLE! RICH people are the ONLY ones who currently Pay Taxes and Hire People! Without them there would be LITERALLY NO BUSINESSES OR TAXES!

[-] Wiz@midwest.social 9 points 1 month ago

Poe's Law is doing some heavy lifting, here.

[-] pyre@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

just so people know: op is not serious. check their history.

[-] MentallyExhausted@reddthat.com 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Man I really thought this was a setup for a joke, but…nope. Just deranged screeching.

Edit: okay I guess it’s a bit

[-] EarthShipTechIntern@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago

Are you aspiring to write for the Onion?

That was some thick shit you spewed on the page.

[-] vga@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Well, I'm glad they're trying it and not us. I think this is a highly risky move and will lead to bad unintended consequences. But I'm not a huge ideologue and won't mind terribly if I'm proven wrong on this.

[-] RunawayFixer@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

Some people are unable to learn from the past. And the last time this happened isn't even that long ago.

In 2012 then candidate president Hollande did a surprise announcement of a 75% tax on earners of 1m+. And it was such a surprise that even the fiscal expert on his team was surprised.

Before Hollande was even elected, rich people started responding by changing their domicile to outside France, often also actually (part time) emigrating.

After getting elected Hollande then tasked his government with implementing such a tax. And that whole lengthy process was a political disaster, ending with the implementation of a heavily watered down temporary tax.

The chronology: https://www.lesechos.fr/2015/01/chronologie-de-la-taxe-a-75-sur-les-tres-hauts-revenus-avant-disparition-197994

After implementation the tax failed to bring in the projected money, because well, people react to what they perceive as overtaxation + the overall economy wasn't doing so great due to this and other policies of Hollande: https://taxfoundation.org/blog/france-s-75-percent-tax-rate-offers-lesson-revenue-estimating/

Half an article with a graph of the effect on wages, the rest is behind a paywall: https://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2019/06/28/quand-la-taxe-a-75-a-ete-supprimee-le-nombre-de-contribuables-declarant-plus-de-1-million-d-euros-par-an-a-augmente_5482849_3232.html

In 2017 Hollande was the most unpopular french president in history and he did not run for reelection. Not solely because of this tax, but it certainly didn't help.

And that was 75%. So a 90% tax on the rich is just incredibly dumb populism.

[-] RunawayFixer@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Currently this post sits at 5 down votes, so it's not just that some people are unable to learn from the past, it's people who are unwilling to learn from the past.

If you're presented with evidence that what you want to do, will not work and will have negative consequences and you still want it to go ahead, then I have to ask: Why?

Why insist on doing something again which has failed in the past and which will undoubtedly fail again in the future? What is this meant to accomplish?

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2024
510 points (98.3% liked)

politics

18586 readers
4350 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS