The people that have money are just going to move their money offshore/to a different countryanyways... I agree with flat taxes, as to me it's the most fundamentally fair way, I'm not sure on what %, and generally anything other than that is just going to get abused, even if the reason for a lot of the loopholes were originally done for good reasons.

... Good luck getting that passed in the U.S. though, where both sides like to be useless together. :).

Are you being deliberately dense or do you really not know how a progressive taxation system works?

When you hit 1 million euros in France your income doesn't suddently drop to 250K. Only those Euros earned above 1 million are taxed at 75%.

If you have a 4 tier taxation system say 10% (up to 20K), 20% (20,001K to 70K), 40% (70,001K to 999,999K) and 75% (1 million+) then the first 999,999K you earn is taxed at 40% and below. If you earn 1.1 million then only 100K of what you've earned is taxed at 75%.

You will also note I said the top tax rate should be substantially below 50%. So perhaps you should read things a bit more closely, unles you were deliberately misinterpretting what I wrote there as well.

No, I don't think a flat tax is fairer. Not least because a flatter income tax inevitably leads to a higher consumption tax as a source of govt revenue. And consumption taxes are very regressive. Though if capital gains taxes are set at the same rate as consumption taxes then that makes the over all tax system less regressive.

I happen to be earning well into the top income tax bracket, and while I don't feel rich by any stretch of the imagination I'm happy to pay my taxes because I know what my taxes are paying for. Is the govt inefficient in many of the things it does? yes. Do we have too many politicians and are they paid too much? probably. But these things are only a relatively small proportion of overall govt spending and the overwhelming majority of what the govt spends money on is highly beneficial to the country: roads, hospitals, schools, law enforcement, crime prevention, courts, defence, national security, research and development grants, preserving and protecting the environment, border control, emergency services, libraries,  various social services, embassies and foreign relations, trade agreements, economic development.

I don't like the implications of your "give the lazy free money" comment, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you don't believe all people in need of govt financial assistance are lazy freeloaders. Indeed I will do you the charity of crediting you with enough intelligence to know that the vast majority of people who need govt financial assistance are NOT lazy free loaders. I hope my charity is not misplaced.

If you want to give to the poor then give to charity. The Government spend too much on junk we don't need.

I don't want a progressive tax system or sales tax or any of that garbage. I want a flat income tax that everyone has to pay with no loopholes no matter how much or little you make. I want the government to only take what it needs to run and justify it's spending publicly. I don't want the government doing anything the private sector could do better or cheaper.

BTW, I don't believe everyone down on their luck are lazy. But I do think there are far FAR too many second and third generation welfare lifers sucking free money out of the system. I would rather the needy get help from charities than the government. The welfare system in this country has become too easy to live on so too many have no incentive to get out of it. It was supposed to be a helping hand but it has become a hand out.

The system is too broken to fix. It needs to be replaced.

Only providing the elderly (that is 20% of the population) a basic government pension takes up 5% GDP in the Netherlands (a typical European state). Then getting the elderly healthcare costs roughly another 5% GDP which they won't be able to afford on their own. 

Then there are some basic expenses like rent on government loans (2% GDP), a pathetic military (1% GDP), police and justice system (1,5% GDP), infrastructure (1% GDP)

I think you dont see the problem here. Its highly questionable why anyone earns more than 100k a month or even 10k.  He just got there because of connections or because he keeps the money for himself and the people that work for his company get minimum wage or whatever.


There is no person in the world that deserves more than 10k a month.   Why do you think people get 10k or more a month? They do it because they decide that they get 10k and they also decide that the average joe  gets just enough to survive and keep working without having enough to do what they want.

IMHO 90% tax on people that earn 100k or more would be at least fair.  OR  make your workers get more money and dont be such a f*cking greedy boss.

Flat taxation is the only way you can get everybody to pay their fair share. The UK increased the highest rate tax from 40% to 50% just at the end of the last government in 2010. Tax revenues from that bracket have dropped since.

Now their is uproar because the rate is being dropped to 45% in April because apparently "the poor are subsidizing the rich tax breaks". However, it's more likely that the lower rate will bring in more tax receipts, which in turn means more money to fund the NHS and benefits for those on hard times.

Don't get me wrong, we do need to pay tax, however I think a flat 15% tax for ALL citizens (remembering that the less you earn, the less 15% actually is in monetary terms), a close down of all avoidance/loopholes, you pay this 15% on any form of income, and then very harsh penalties for those still avoiding tax, will actually benefits such as me on lower wages as I'll pay less tax, but the sheer number of extra people who have been avoiding tax will more than compensate and put more money into the system.

It's just that no government has the balls to try anything radical.

I want to add some stats. Depardieu employs 80 people and paid in the last 45 years 145 million Euro taxes. The typical discussion you now get is ' He already pain enough and a lot more than thoze lazy losers ever will' versus ' He made so much money thx to the people so ofcourse he have to pay much taxes'...

Really it more makres me wonder what wil happen to those 80 people... in the US at least chances are his buisnesses would also be taxed under that 75% rate.

That and what tax projections look like... are they stil going to come out ahead?

I'm suprised they still keep their Triple A status... considering that even in baseline situations they are going to have a higher debt to gdp ratio then most -AAA countries.

Guess they still get a bit of the "Old Empire" love though.

Hollande down to 37% approval rating, which is shocking considering how high it was when he was first elected.  Seems like an Obama "too muc hope" situation, cause france hasn't had THAT many issues since the election has it?

75% tax is ridiculous. It has the potential to fuck Frances economy

Forget about the rest of your post... you think that most of the people who earn 10k+ a month only got there through connections? Got any data on that?