New French Tax rate

Sparky_Hughes said:
Bugger me I see chairman pete and his commie chums are out in force this morning.

So, lets get this straight, a bright young kid goes off to uni, studies for years to becaome a doctor, more years specialising in a certain area, and becomes one of the best around. And we should reward/ encourage this by taking vast sums of money he has legitimately earned away from him. Tell you what, why not cap his wages to the same as those in a 9-5 unskilled factory job.....that will really encourage people to do something difficult.
Click to expand...

It's not "taking vast sums of money he has legitimately earned away from him". It's asking him to pay taxes towards the good of society. A society that has benefited him immensely.

Let's take your example, does the government help fund the university? Does the government help fund his schooling prior to university? Do they provide roads that allow him to get to and from the university? Do they provide a police force that allows him to live his life without fear of being attacked? Do they provide healthcare in case he gets sick? Do they help fund the teachers that help him specialize in a certain area? Do they provide a free society that encourages people to better themselves and make money? Do they provide electricity that allows him to learn his craft? Do they provide a standard currency which he earns and buys things with?


All of these things cost money. Paying taxes isn't a punishment, it's your contribution to society. This right wing idea that people's success is independent of government is silly. This stuff matters. You can't opt out of society. Like it or not, we're all in this together. The idea that asking someone to pay taxes is taking from them is ridiculous. Reasonable people can disagree over what the exact rate should be but some of the comments in this thread act like successful people are successful in spite of government and that's just wrong.
 
peterstorey said:
I'd rather be a doctor than drive a London bus all day even if the wages were the same.
Click to expand...

You would rather work extremely long hours in a high pressure job, with the power of life and death, and all the sould searching that entails when something inevitably goes wrong, plus the years of study, as opposed to a simple thought free job with minimal reprecussions should you feck up and can forget about when clocking off time comes all for the same wage?

Fair play to you, I think you would be in the minority though.
 
Eboue27 said:
It's not "taking vast sums of money he has legitimately earned away from him". It's asking him to pay taxes towards the good of society. A society that has benefited him immensely.

Let's take your example, does the government help fund the university? Does the government help fund his schooling prior to university? Do they provide roads that allow him to get to and from the university? Do they provide a police force that allows him to live his life without fear of being attacked? Do they provide healthcare in case he gets sick? Do they help fund the teachers that help him specialize in a certain area? Do they provide a free society that encourages people to better themselves and make money? Do they provide electricity that allows him to learn his craft? Do they provide a standard currency which he earns and buys things with?


All of these things cost money. Paying taxes isn't a punishment, it's your contribution to society. This right wing idea that people's success is independent of government is silly. This stuff matters. You can't opt out of society. Like it or not, we're all in this together. The idea that asking someone to pay taxes is taking from them is ridiculous. Reasonable people can disagree over what the exact rate should be but some of the comments in this thread act like successful people are successful in spite of government and that's just wrong.
Click to expand...

Dont get me wrong, im not anti tax. Im anti unfare taxation. There is only one truely fair system of tax, and that is everybody pays the same rate. The wealthy are still paying more that way but in an acceptable manor, not, right, you have loads lets take most of it off you.
 
Sparky_Hughes said:
Dont get me wrong, im not anti tax. Im anti unfare taxation. There is only one truely fair system of tax, and that is everybody pays the same rate. The wealthy are still paying more that way but in an acceptable manor, not, right, you have loads lets take most of it off you.
Click to expand...


If you think there is wealth disparity now, just wait till a flat tax gets instituted.
 
Eboue27 said:
It's not "taking vast sums of money he has legitimately earned away from him". It's asking him to pay taxes towards the good of society. A society that has benefited him immensely.

Let's take your example, does the government help fund the university? Does the government help fund his schooling prior to university? Do they provide roads that allow him to get to and from the university? Do they provide a police force that allows him to live his life without fear of being attacked? Do they provide healthcare in case he gets sick? Do they help fund the teachers that help him specialize in a certain area? Do they provide a free society that encourages people to better themselves and make money? Do they provide electricity that allows him to learn his craft? Do they provide a standard currency which he earns and buys things with?


All of these things cost money. Paying taxes isn't a punishment, it's your contribution to society. This right wing idea that people's success is independent of government is silly. This stuff matters. You can't opt out of society. Like it or not, we're all in this together. The idea that asking someone to pay taxes is taking from them is ridiculous. Reasonable people can disagree over what the exact rate should be but some of the comments in this thread act like successful people are successful in spite of government and that's just wrong.
Click to expand...

The point is that he probably can achieve that (or even more) in another country without getting fleeced. So yes in a certain way you can choose which society you live in.

I think that people would be more willing to give if the government is fair and accountable to them. I'd rather see my tax money go on free tertiary education for everyone rather then financing some unemployed person's holiday (and yes ive seen unemployed brits on holiday)
 
Sarni said:
It's pretty normal and the way it should be, investors go to the most attractive countries.
Click to expand...

Why should it be that you cut the welfare, education, health care and working rights of the majority to suit a tiny number of investestors?
 
Sparky_Hughes said:
Bugger me I see chairman pete and his commie chums are out in force this morning.

So, lets get this straight, a bright young kid goes off to uni, studies for years to becaome a doctor, more years specialising in a certain area, and becomes one of the best around. And we should reward/ encourage this by taking vast sums of money he has legitimately earned away from him. Tell you what, why not cap his wages to the same as those in a 9-5 unskilled factory job.....that will really encourage people to do something difficult.
Click to expand...

He'll have lived in a society which would have educated him, supported his parents with various benefits, kept him in good health so having benefited most from society he can afford to make the bigger contirbution back to society to pay for it
 
Mozza said:
Why should it be that you cut the welfare, education, health care and working rights of the majority to suit a tiny number of investestors?
Click to expand...

Without the latter there is no work, no money for healthcare and education etc.

Im not saying that you should be the business men's bitch. However you need to keep that issue in account while cutting on unneccessary things (straight pay checks to free loaders, military budgets and wars etc)
 
All of you feckers complaining about the tax would probably sell your left nut to be paying that 75% tax because you know, you'd be earning 1m euros a year.

It's a very simple economic idea, looking at the margins, people will keep on working as long as the marginal benefit of what they earn over 1m after tax exceeds the effort they put into doing so (they could move abroad in theory, but there are huge sunk costs of doing so like learning the language, moving house and shit) then they will keep on working. Especially as most people earning over 1m, not all of their salary will be in the form of taxable income but also shares and different shit.
 
Ain't nothing wrong with the rich paying proportionally more money back into the society, but 75% is too much, and when you have people here saying that's brilliant, it's not enough, feck the rich...
 
devilish said:
Without the latter there is no work, no money for healthcare and education etc.

Im not saying that you should be the business men's bitch. However you need to keep that issue in account while cutting on unneccessary things (straight pay checks to free loaders, military budgets and wars etc)
Click to expand...

Bull, we had public education, healthcare and welfare before capital could run around the world chasing the lowest tax rate
 
Mozza said:
Bull, we had public education, healthcare and welfare before capital could run around the world chasing the lowest tax rate
Click to expand...

Businesses have evolved and you've got to evolve to it. Its like insisting on the discovery and sale of holy catholic relics because it was a highly profitable business during the middle ages. Globalization is here to stay. Live with it.

I am all in favor of public education, healthcare and welfare. However things needs to be prioritized. For example should a normal, perfectly healthy girl, get a free boob job because her A size tits are too small for her and make her feel inferior? Is it worth financing the war in Iraq when its perfectly evident that there was no WMDs there? Should generous straight pay cheques be given to unemployed people or would it be better to invest more on internships and free tertiary education? Is it really necessary to finance royalty?
 
http://football.uk.reuters.com/football/news/2012/09/28/BA490C64-09A8-11E2-B294-D5058033923B.php

New French taxes will be "disastrous" for football
20:58 BST, Fri 28 Sep 2012
PARIS (Reuters) - Clubs and players lashed out after the French government unveiled its 2013 budget on Friday, saying new tax plans would have a "disastrous effect" on domestic football.
FOOTBALL

Tax hikes include a "temporary" 75 percent levy on annual earnings in excess of one million euros ($1.29 million) and a new rate of 45 percent on incomes above 150,000 euros.
The existing rate is 40 percent on earnings above 69,505 euros. The government said the new "temporary" levy would be in operation until the country's debts were cleared.
"The taxes will have a disastrous effect on the competitiveness of French football," the professional clubs association (UCPF), the association of professional footballers (UNFP) and the French League (LFP) said in a joint statement.
UCPF chief Philippe Diallo told Reuters the new taxes would cost the clubs around 150 million euros.
"The impact is significant for us in a very unfavourable period for French football, since we lost 131 million euros in 2011," said Diallo.
"In some cases it is the club who will pay the taxes of the players."
Sweden striker Zlatan Ibrahimovic, who earns nine million euros a year at Paris St Germain according to media reports, will pay more than six million euros in taxes under the new government plans.
Socialist President Francois Hollande's 2013 budget amounts to France's toughest belt-tightening for 30 years.
The package aims to narrow the country's deficit to three percent of national output next year from 4.5 percent this year, bringing in 30 billion euros for the treasury.
(Reporting by Gregory Blachier and Julien Pretot; editing by Tony Jimenez)
Click to expand...
 
adexkola said:
Ain't nothing wrong with the rich paying proportionally more money back into the society, but 75% is too much, and when you have people here saying that's brilliant, it's not enough, feck the rich...
Click to expand...

I agree that 75% is generally too high a tax rate, I think that income taxes shouldn't be high to ostensibly punish the rich but to ensure that all levels of society pay as according to their means to secure a stable society, but as a temporary measure to plug a deficit I have much more sympathy for the poor people born into poverty than someone who's earning over 1m when it comes to austerity measures.

On to the football related note, anyone with half a brain would have written in a clause into their contract when it was apparent that the socialists would be elected and I would expect that there are going to be some exemptions for non-domicile earners in France hence it's probably going to affect those players homegrown in France. If you look at the Ben Arfas and Cabayes of the world, they were getting paid much less in France even before the tax in the PL. I suspect not much has changed in any regard.
 
Jaz said:
It's a bit like Investment Banking...everyone thinks they can do. In fact no, you cannot, the bank gives you a huge amount of their money, and you have to sit there making huge decisions day-to-day. This is why from the entire UK they hire about a firm would hire about 20 people for those roles, they are usually the very very mathematically brightest, and able to cope with immense stress. To attract these kinds of people the high pay incentives and bonuses are needed.
Click to expand...

I followed you until you got into investment banking. Some investment bankers cannot do rather basic arithmetic. The really clever ones make models and most of those don't actually earn that much (by industry standards), the ones that get the bonuses and highlife are more often than not just blaggers who do good PR and have no worries about screwing their granny out of their retirement money.

peterstorey said:
You've never been inside an investment bank and talked to senior managers have you?
Click to expand...

Clearly hasn't

Jaz said:
I have friends there.. and they are terrible for the most part. The good news is that they are really bright. I guess it's what the bank values the most.
Click to expand...

He wasn't referring to morals, he was referring to clever. Most actually aren't. The higher up you go the less of a clue they have because "survival of the fittest" in that industry is rarely about investment brilliance or academic genius.
 
Jaz said:
Having worked in Tescos, the managers there were barely capable of managing a department in a 1 store. The number of people with the skills are attributes required to manage a region, a country, or a global firm is very slim. There's demand, but supply of people who could actually do these jobs are very very limited. Any one in any form of employment can recognise bad managers, bad team leaders, there's very few people who you can pick out and say "I think person x is very good". Right now I work with around 10 different managers or directors, and in my honest opinion only 8 are real quality people, leaders and decision makers.

It's a bit like Investment Banking...everyone thinks they can do. In fact no, you cannot, the bank gives you a huge amount of their money, and you have to sit there making huge decisions day-to-day. This is why from the entire UK they hire about a firm would hire about 20 people for those roles, they are usually the very very mathematically brightest, and able to cope with immense stress. To attract these kinds of people the high pay incentives and bonuses are needed.
Click to expand...

peterstorey said:
A lot of people are retiring at 60 or earlier in the UK because no one will give them a job.
Click to expand...

Thats why i dont think that pushing retiring rate beyond 64 is stupid. However there are many healthy and fully productive people at age 60. One of my former bosses would go toe to toe with the typical 20 yr old in terms of fitness
 
devilish said:
Without the latter there is no work, no money for healthcare and education etc.

Im not saying that you should be the business men's bitch. However you need to keep that issue in account while cutting on unneccessary things (straight pay checks to free loaders, military budgets and wars etc)
Click to expand...

But we are. It is a matter of fact it today's society that the majority of population are business men's bitches. Someone could say that we are modern slaves which I to a degree I agree.
 
Sparky_Hughes said:
Bugger me I see chairman pete and his commie chums are out in force this morning.

So, lets get this straight, a bright young kid goes off to uni, studies for years to becaome a doctor, more years specialising in a certain area, and becomes one of the best around. And we should reward/ encourage this by taking vast sums of money he has legitimately earned away from him. Tell you what, why not cap his wages to the same as those in a 9-5 unskilled factory job.....that will really encourage people to do something difficult.
Click to expand...

And then Nicole Scherzinger earns for a 45 minute concert more money that the bright doctor earns for 2-3 years. Or more than he earns in lifetime if he is in a poor country.
 
antohan said:
I followed you until you got into investment banking. Some investment bankers cannot do rather basic arithmetic. The really clever ones make models and most of those don't actually earn that much (by industry standards), the ones that get the bonuses and highlife are more often than not just blaggers who do good PR and have no worries about screwing their granny out of their retirement money.



Clearly hasn't



He wasn't referring to morals, he was referring to clever. Most actually aren't. The higher up you go the less of a clue they have because "survival of the fittest" in that industry is rarely about investment brilliance or academic genius.
Click to expand...

Actually investment bankers can do arithmetic due to the nature of the selection process. They don't need to once they are there. It's immensely competitive to get there, the testing is pretty difficult to land yourself in one of those jobs. I think you gotta be pretty insane to think these people are not 'clever' in some way, probably lacking common sense though.

It takes a lot of skill to survive in higher posts before your own colleagues and staff, other managers, directors begin to doubt your actions and capabilities. So it agree, it's survival of the fittest. It takes some doing to survive.
 
Ismail Elezi said:
But we are. It is a matter of fact it today's society that the majority of population are business men's bitches. Someone could say that we are modern slaves which I to a degree I agree.
Click to expand...

You dont know the standard of living slaves were reduced to dont you? However i agree that its getting tough for us and unless theres some sort of change we may end up facing big consequences. Many wars started in recessions.
 
Ismail Elezi said:
And then Nicole Scherzinger earns for a 45 minute concert more money that the bright doctor earns for 2-3 years. Or more than he earns in lifetime if he is in a poor country.
Click to expand...

The big difference is that there are 200,000 doctors and one Nicole Scherzinger. A doctor can't charge to entertain 50k+ people for 45 minutes... Nicole can though... :wenger:
 
devilish said:
You dont know the standard of living slaves were reduced to dont you? However i agree that its getting tough for us and unless theres some sort of change we may end up facing big consequences. Many wars started in recessions.
Click to expand...

I am not understanding this.

Could one of the mods set this thread in the general please, cause it's not that much for football anymore?
 
Ismail Elezi said:
I am not understanding this.

Could one of the mods set this thread in the general please, cause it's not that much for football anymore?
Click to expand...

I apologize my English is far from perfect.

Slaves had a much worse life then the common modern worker.
 
Jaz said:
The big difference is that there are 200,000 doctors and one Nicole Scherzinger. A doctor can't charge to entertain 50k+ people for 45 minutes... Nicole can though... :wenger:
Click to expand...

That is the problem. No-one should earn a million for 45 min. And it's not only one, the money that singers, actors and sportsmen earns is fecking ridiculous.
 
Jaz said:
The big difference is that there are 200,000 doctors and one Nicole Scherzinger. A doctor can't charge to entertain 50k+ people for 45 minutes... Nicole can though... :wenger:
Click to expand...

whats the most important thing though? Saving someone's life or entertain 50k people?

This ecceses in life is what driving the world into madness. Im all in favor of enterpreneurs becoming filthy rich as long as their producing work to society. However I fail to understand how someone as talentless as Justin Bieber could become a millionare at such a young age. The likes of Mozart are probably turning in their graves.
 
devilish said:
I apologize my English is far from perfect.

Slaves had a much worse life then the common modern worker.
Click to expand...

Of course that they had worse life than us.

Anyway my point is that the capitalism is a form of feudalism system when we have a small number of people who control everything. By everything I literally mean everything. Now there is no need to make workers work 16 hours a day, kiss your legs or to kill them, but the system has evolved in that way that most of the people are build to be slaves. Brainwashing from media and almost every aspect of our life contributes to achieve it.
 
Ismail Elezi said:
That is the problem. No-one should earn a million for 45 min. And it's not only one, the money that singers, actors and sportsmen earns is fecking ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Why not?

She's not stealing money, she's not forcing people go watch her. People are willing to pay to see her. They do. These people are willing to pay upto £100 for those 45 minutes of Nicole, not for anyone else.

75,000 people go to old trafford to see 11 men kick a ball. Millions upon millions pay for their TV licenses/subscriptions to see 11 men kick a ball. They go to see Manchester United, and thus deserve the cash.
 
devilish said:
whats the most important thing though? Saving someone's life or entertain 50k people?

This ecceses in life is what driving the world into madness. Im all in favor of enterpreneurs becoming filthy rich as long as their producing work to society. However I fail to understand how someone as talentless as Justin Bieber could become a millionare at such a young age. The likes of Mozart are probably turning in their graves.
Click to expand...

There's a lot of research out there which suggest people are willing to die earlier for a better quality of life. Never underestimate the power of entertainment, fun and joy.
 
Jaz said:
Why not?

She's not stealing money, she's not forcing people go watch her. People are willing to pay to see her. They do. These people are willing to pay upto £100 for those 45 minutes of Nicole, not for anyone else.

75,000 people go to old trafford to see 11 men kick a ball. Millions upon millions pay for their TV licenses/subscriptions to see 11 men kick a ball. They go to see Manchester United, and thus deserve the cash.
Click to expand...

Probably you are not understanding what I am trying to say. My point is that the system is wrong, the capitalism is a system which benefits the top part of the population and which to me it is a bad evil system.
 
Jaz said:
Why not?

She's not stealing money, she's not forcing people go watch her. People are willing to pay to see her. They do. These people are willing to pay upto £100 for those 45 minutes of Nicole, not for anyone else.

75,000 people go to old trafford to see 11 men kick a ball. Millions upon millions pay for their TV licenses/subscriptions to see 11 men kick a ball. They go to see Manchester United, and thus deserve the cash.
Click to expand...

The logic of it is flawless if you buy into capitalism, if you don't then it's ridiculous.
 
Jaz said:
There's a lot of research out there which suggest people are willing to die earlier for a better quality of life. Never underestimate the power of entertainment, fun and joy.
Click to expand...

Would you like to live without doctors, or without singers, actors and footballers together?
 
Ismail Elezi said:
Of course that they had worse life than us.

Anyway my point is that the capitalism is a form of feudalism system when we have a small number of people who control everything. By everything I literally mean everything. Now there is no need to make workers work 16 hours a day, kiss your legs or to kill them, but the system has evolved in that way that most of the people are build to be slaves. Brainwashing from media and almost every aspect of our life contributes to achieve it.
Click to expand...

I think youre being a bit too negative. However I agree with you that think must change. Our current political model has yet to come to terms with globalization. For example is it morally right that company A that produces kits by using sweat shops is allowed to sell these items in the western world?
What about the EU? What are the advantages of being part of it if organizations in any country can sell their products (at a cheaper rate) in the EU? If the EU cant control who reaps its fruits, then whats the point of being in it in the first place?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.