Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   It looks like France will settle that whole tax the rich debate for us. Let's see how well that works out for them   (nytimes.com) divider line 275
    More: Obvious, Vincent Grandil  
•       •       •

3420 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Aug 2012 at 8:59 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



275 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-08 07:54:44 AM  
Poorly.

There's nothing wrong with raising taxes (even on the rich) a bit. Maybe even as much as 5%. But all the way to 75%!??
 
2012-08-08 08:18:02 AM  
75% is a tad excessive, but let's look at it another way. Okay so the rich want to leave, assuming France is capable of of not letting them leave and use tax loopholes to keep collecting money from their businesses, they'll have to cash out of their various businesses. Can't really sell them as a whole, only another rich person could buy it and they're leaving, so perhaps it gets split up instead. So suddenly the business providing 1 person with more money than they could ever need is providing 10, 100, 1000 people with a very comfortable living instead of a paycheck-to-paycheck lifestyle.
 
2012-08-08 08:21:32 AM  
So 75% of earnings over €1M is the tipping pont to leave France and increasing the rate on $20M to over 14% is the tipping point for the US?

American exceptionalism.
 
2012-08-08 08:31:42 AM  

doyner: So 75% of earnings over €1M is the tipping pont to leave France and increasing the rate on $20M to over 14% is the tipping point for the US?

American exceptionalism.


But don't you see? American rich are being taxed to death! That's why Mitt Romney is only worth $250M. Can't you see how bad he's hurting?
 
2012-08-08 08:32:07 AM  
Good thing nothing like France's rate is being proposed, isn't it?
 
2012-08-08 08:53:01 AM  

Aarontology: Good thing nothing like France's rate is being proposed, isn't it?


Funny how it was that high in the past here in the US, though...

/and even higher
 
2012-08-08 08:57:21 AM  

itsdan: 75% is a tad excessive, but let's look at it another way. Okay so the rich want to leave, assuming France is capable of of not letting them leave and use tax loopholes to keep collecting money from their businesses, they'll have to cash out of their various businesses. Can't really sell them as a whole, only another rich person could buy it and they're leaving, so perhaps it gets split up instead. So suddenly the business providing 1 person with more money than they could ever need is providing 10, 100, 1000 people with a very comfortable living instead of a paycheck-to-paycheck lifestyle.


So, where are they going to go?
 
2012-08-08 09:02:20 AM  
It is really bizarre how conservatives try to pretend that history literally doesn't exist. You guys know that the US "taxed the rich" WAY higher in the past...
 
2012-08-08 09:03:30 AM  

dr_blasto: itsdan: 75% is a tad excessive, but let's look at it another way. Okay so the rich want to leave, assuming France is capable of of not letting them leave and use tax loopholes to keep collecting money from their businesses, they'll have to cash out of their various businesses. Can't really sell them as a whole, only another rich person could buy it and they're leaving, so perhaps it gets split up instead. So suddenly the business providing 1 person with more money than they could ever need is providing 10, 100, 1000 people with a very comfortable living instead of a paycheck-to-paycheck lifestyle.

So, where are they going to go?


To the US, where they'll only be taxed 15%-35% (or whatever the numbers are - but a heck of a lot less than 75%)
 
2012-08-08 09:04:01 AM  

xanadian: Poorly.

There's nothing wrong with raising taxes (even on the rich) a bit. Maybe even as much as 5%. But all the way to 75%!??


Holy crap, THIS.

I am in favor for an increase on our more wealthier citizens, but that might be a bit TOO much...
 
2012-08-08 09:05:06 AM  
75% on $1.24 million leaves $310,000 leftover.

Sorry, but anyone who can't live a comfortable-as-hell lifestyle without a care in the world on the equivalent of $310,000/year is horrible with money and doesn't deserve any of it.
 
2012-08-08 09:05:07 AM  

dr_blasto: itsdan: 75% is a tad excessive, but let's look at it another way. Okay so the rich want to leave, assuming France is capable of of not letting them leave and use tax loopholes to keep collecting money from their businesses, they'll have to cash out of their various businesses. Can't really sell them as a whole, only another rich person could buy it and they're leaving, so perhaps it gets split up instead. So suddenly the business providing 1 person with more money than they could ever need is providing 10, 100, 1000 people with a very comfortable living instead of a paycheck-to-paycheck lifestyle.

So, where are they going to go?


Somewhere where it's cheaper to buy off the politicians and the population is more desperate. Probably Greece
 
2012-08-08 09:06:30 AM  
"Here, someone who is a self-made man, creating jobs and ending up as a millionaire, is viewed with suspicion. This is big cultural difference between France and the United States."

I dunno, as more and more examples come out of people gaming the system and working to change the rules after they made enough where the old rules stopped being profitable for them and the gap grows wider and starts impacting more people Americans are coming around.
 
2012-08-08 09:06:39 AM  
They are going to raise the tax rate on money over 1m to 75% in France...that is socialism and doomed to failure.

Therefore, raising the rate on everything over $380,000 from 36% to 39.6% is equally stupid.
 
2012-08-08 09:06:57 AM  
Raise the capital gains tax, not "taxes." People who sweat for their millions deserve preference over rentiers.
 
2012-08-08 09:07:33 AM  

Kome: 75% on $1.24 million leaves $310,000 leftover.

Sorry, but anyone who can't live a comfortable-as-hell lifestyle without a care in the world on the equivalent of $310,000/year is horrible with money and doesn't deserve any of it.


Anybody who thinks someone who makes $1.24m should pay 930k of it to the government is a horrible person no better than a mugger or corrupt politician.
 
2012-08-08 09:07:42 AM  

Kome: 75% on $1.24 million leaves $310,000 leftover.
Sorry, but anyone who can't live a comfortable-as-hell lifestyle without a care in the world on the equivalent of $310,000/year is horrible with money and doesn't deserve any of it.


Ignoring the argument about what is "comfortable" to live on...you did the math wrong for progressive taxation.
 
2012-08-08 09:08:08 AM  
So we're comparing a possible 3% rise if the Bush Tax Cuts expire vs 75%?
 
2012-08-08 09:08:08 AM  

Kome: 75% on $1.24 million leaves $310,000 leftover.

Sorry, but anyone who can't live a comfortable-as-hell lifestyle without a care in the world on the equivalent of $310,000/year is horrible with money and doesn't deserve any of it.


I believe the 75% kicks in only on dollars over 1MM so that .24 is what is taxed at that rate.
 
2012-08-08 09:10:19 AM  

bulldg4life: Kome: 75% on $1.24 million leaves $310,000 leftover.
Sorry, but anyone who can't live a comfortable-as-hell lifestyle without a care in the world on the equivalent of $310,000/year is horrible with money and doesn't deserve any of it.

Ignoring the argument about what is "comfortable" to live on...you did the math wrong for progressive taxation.


This.

It astounds me how few people truly understand how a tax bracket system work.

I understand not getting how all the different exemptions work, but the tax brackets aren't even highschool level math.
 
2012-08-08 09:10:37 AM  

xanadian: Poorly.

There's nothing wrong with raising taxes (even on the rich) a bit. Maybe even as much as 5%. But all the way to 75%!??


And when this fails, the Republicans will crow about how "look how badly taxing the rich worked out in France!" They won't bother to realize there's a difference between 40% and 75%.
 
2012-08-08 09:11:10 AM  
www.washingtonpost.com
 
2012-08-08 09:11:16 AM  
Hey dumbmitter -

All us dirty libs have said is that a 3% increase (or whatever it is) on the highest earners is right. Not one politician has said (at least that I've heard) "LET'S TAX THEM AT SEVENTY FIVE PERCENT!!!! AHAHAHAHAHA"

farking stupid right wing propaganda.
 
2012-08-08 09:11:44 AM  

Kome: 75% on $1.24 million leaves $310,000 leftover.

Sorry, but anyone who can't live a comfortable-as-hell lifestyle without a care in the world on the equivalent of $310,000/year is horrible with money and doesn't deserve any of it.


First, it's 75% on earnings ABOVE $1.24m.

Second, there's a host of issues beyond "can one live on this?". Including fairness, enforcement, effective tax rates, and practicality in a continent with low cost of moving countries.

15-18% is very low, but 75%? In the modern, Internet age? That seems silly high.
 
2012-08-08 09:12:07 AM  

bulldg4life: They are going to raise the tax rate on money over 1m to 75% in France...that is socialism and doomed to failure.

Therefore, raising the rate on everything over $380,000 from 36% to 39.6% is equally stupid.


supermariotwins

"They look so goddamn like the same thing"

/supermariotwins
 
2012-08-08 09:12:14 AM  
FTFA: "Should I be preparing to leave the country?" the executive asked Mr. Grandil.


encrypted-tbn1.google.com
 
2012-08-08 09:12:48 AM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Kome: 75% on $1.24 million leaves $310,000 leftover.

Sorry, but anyone who can't live a comfortable-as-hell lifestyle without a care in the world on the equivalent of $310,000/year is horrible with money and doesn't deserve any of it.

Anybody who thinks someone who makes $1.24m should pay 930k of it to the government is a horrible person no better than a mugger or corrupt politician.


Nobody thinks that, it's just that you guys don't seem to understand how a progressive tax structure works.
 
2012-08-08 09:12:55 AM  

Bill Frist: It is really bizarre how conservatives try to pretend that history literally doesn't exist. You guys know that the US "taxed the rich" WAY higher in the past...


They also taxed them much lower in the past. Why are the supposedly higher tax rates of the 1950s (which featured many many more deductions than today) any better than the rates of the 90s or today or one hundred years ago?

We had higher tax rates for a time and justifiably lowered them. There can be a rational argument for higher taxes than we have now (I'd like to see all the bush and Obama tax cuts expire/phase out), but no reasonable person should support 75% tax rates on any level of income.
 
2012-08-08 09:14:30 AM  

HMS_Blinkin: Debeo Summa Credo: Kome: 75% on $1.24 million leaves $310,000 leftover.

Sorry, but anyone who can't live a comfortable-as-hell lifestyle without a care in the world on the equivalent of $310,000/year is horrible with money and doesn't deserve any of it.

Anybody who thinks someone who makes $1.24m should pay 930k of it to the government is a horrible person no better than a mugger or corrupt politician.

Nobody thinks that, it's just that you guys don't seem to understand how a progressive tax structure works.


Kome apparently thinks that. Why else would he use the numbers he did?
 
2012-08-08 09:14:36 AM  

bulldg4life: Kome: 75% on $1.24 million leaves $310,000 leftover.
Sorry, but anyone who can't live a comfortable-as-hell lifestyle without a care in the world on the equivalent of $310,000/year is horrible with money and doesn't deserve any of it.

Ignoring the argument about what is "comfortable" to live on...you did the math wrong for progressive taxation.


Yes, but how many people who cry in these types of threads that the rich pay too much as it is aren't going to make that kind of argument? We get posts like that in threads about taxes all the goddamn time, that the rich are in fear of being taxed 100% of all their income forever and the poor have it so good because almost all of them own a refrigerator. Might as well be the one to throw out the argument preemptively and still argue that they're leftover with more money than most people make over the course of 6 years (using 2011 mean income data).
 
2012-08-08 09:14:44 AM  

bulldg4life: Kome: 75% on $1.24 million leaves $310,000 leftover.
Sorry, but anyone who can't live a comfortable-as-hell lifestyle without a care in the world on the equivalent of $310,000/year is horrible with money and doesn't deserve any of it.

Ignoring the argument about what is "comfortable" to live on...you did the math wrong for progressive taxation.


This happens in almost every argument about progressive taxes. Look at the US for example; keeping the taxes at current levels for
 
2012-08-08 09:15:32 AM  
Surely we can all agree there's a farking middle ground, right?

I mean, in the one year of tax returns Mitt Romney released, he paid 13.9% tax. That's obviously too low - it's lower than what many people pay who earn 1/100th of what Mitt makes. 75%? That's probably high enough that it's going to be counter-productive. But what about 50% on incomes more than 1,000,000? It's less than we had in the 1950's, and I don't remember that being a decade troubled by a slow economy.
 
2012-08-08 09:16:41 AM  

xanadian: Aarontology: Good thing nothing like France's rate is being proposed, isn't it?

Funny how it was that high in the past here in the US, though...

/and even higher


Yeah, but weren't there a shiat ton of loopholes back then too? Not that there aren't today either for those with an army of tax lawyers and accountants.

Also, It was much, much harder to leave your country and still control your business and investment interests. Today you can have a private plane and the internet and basically be able to do anything you need to from anywhere in the world. Effectively borders are completely irrelevant once someone or something has enough money.
 
2012-08-08 09:17:09 AM  

Debeo Summa Credo: HMS_Blinkin: Debeo Summa Credo: Kome: 75% on $1.24 million leaves $310,000 leftover.

Sorry, but anyone who can't live a comfortable-as-hell lifestyle without a care in the world on the equivalent of $310,000/year is horrible with money and doesn't deserve any of it.

Anybody who thinks someone who makes $1.24m should pay 930k of it to the government is a horrible person no better than a mugger or corrupt politician.

Nobody thinks that, it's just that you guys don't seem to understand how a progressive tax structure works.

Kome apparently thinks that. Why else would he use the numbers he did?


Because he sucks at math.
 
2012-08-08 09:17:23 AM  
Considering the sheer arrogance of the 1% a year at 75% over 1.5 million would be a good exercise for them to know exactly how bad things really could be.

Think of it as a forced crash course in perspective.

And go ahead, move out of the country. Give us a reason to reform immigration while you're gone.
 
2012-08-08 09:17:43 AM  
I would've expected a phased implementation, perhaps reaching that point over the course of, say, 5 years rather than something so immediate.

And insofar as the US is concerned, I'm just as pissed at how money is shuttled about to avoid as much tax as possible rather than the tax rates themselves.

/Though, really, jack up the rates here too
 
2012-08-08 09:19:03 AM  

LasersHurt: supermariotwins


You want ice cream cone? Both of them say yes. I must say, I actually saw Group X at a show on the GT campus some years ago...

Soccer (Soccer) was their best work.

Kome: but how many people who cry in these types of threads that the rich pay too much as it is aren't going to make that kind of argument? We get posts like that in threads about taxes all the goddamn time, that the rich are in fear of being taxed 100% of all their income forever and the poor have it so good because almost all of them own a refrigerator.


But I just make fun of the retards. I don't mess up basic math to get my point across.
 
2012-08-08 09:19:05 AM  
Don't care.

The wealthy will be getting soaked in this country, it's merely a matter of time. Party is about over, and it's time to pay the fiddler.
 
2012-08-08 09:21:49 AM  
They're evil and rich. They need to be punished. The fair share of taxes for anyone who makes more than me is 100%.
 
2012-08-08 09:22:23 AM  
Austerity, ohhhh fine that's ok we can do that. Tax the rich!? Are you nuts!!?

God forbid the lower class tries to assert its true power and elects a socialist. It's only class warfare when then lower classes do it!

www.blogforarizona.com
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-08-08 09:22:39 AM  

Brandyelf: dr_blasto: itsdan: 75% is a tad excessive, but let's look at it another way. Okay so the rich want to leave, assuming France is capable of of not letting them leave and use tax loopholes to keep collecting money from their businesses, they'll have to cash out of their various businesses. Can't really sell them as a whole, only another rich person could buy it and they're leaving, so perhaps it gets split up instead. So suddenly the business providing 1 person with more money than they could ever need is providing 10, 100, 1000 people with a very comfortable living instead of a paycheck-to-paycheck lifestyle.

So, where are they going to go?

To the US, where they'll only be taxed 15%-35% (or whatever the numbers are - but a heck of a lot less than 75%)


That sounds like an argument to do the same here. Or better yet, really jack up the inheritance tax. Wealthy people have too much power over the economy and government, we don't need more of them.
 
2012-08-08 09:23:04 AM  
FTFA:

But because there are relatively few people in France whose income would incur such a tax - an estimated 7,000 to 30,000 in a country of 65 million - the gains might contribute but a small fraction of the 33 billion euros in new revenue the government wants to raise next year to help balance the budget.

The French finance ministry did not respond to requests for an estimate of the revenue the tax might raise. Though the amount would be low, some analysts note that a tax hit on the rich would provide political cover for painful cuts Mr. Hollande may need to make next year in social and welfare programs that are likely to be far less popular with the rank and file.
 
2012-08-08 09:23:41 AM  
Just be glad they didn't dust off the guillotines.
 
2012-08-08 09:23:48 AM  

Gunther: Surely we can all agree there's a farking middle ground, right?

I mean, in the one year of tax returns Mitt Romney released, he paid 13.9% tax. That's obviously too low - it's lower than what many people pay who earn 1/100th of what Mitt makes. 75%? That's probably high enough that it's going to be counter-productive. But what about 50% on incomes more than 1,000,000? It's less than we had in the 1950's, and I don't remember that being a decade troubled by a slow economy.


Capital gains and dividends on investments in corporations are already reduced by corporate income tax. You can't directly compare his 13.9% to taxes on earned income.

/commence with the posting of the obligatory Tom the Dancing Bug cartoon that, contrary to the intentions of the poster, actually supports my view.
 
2012-08-08 09:24:55 AM  
"I don't like the rich."

Damn! There are Occupy people in France also. Eventually all the 1% people will be living in Australia.
 
2012-08-08 09:25:00 AM  

Deneb81: Kome: 75% on $1.24 million leaves $310,000 leftover.

Sorry, but anyone who can't live a comfortable-as-hell lifestyle without a care in the world on the equivalent of $310,000/year is horrible with money and doesn't deserve any of it.

First, it's 75% on earnings ABOVE $1.24m.

Second, there's a host of issues beyond "can one live on this?". Including fairness, enforcement, effective tax rates, and practicality in a continent with low cost of moving countries.

15-18% is very low, but 75%? In the modern, Internet age? That seems silly high.


So in reality, lets say he's paying 30% on the first million and 75% on the .24 millions, thats
480K in taxes, leaving them with 760K, about a 50% effective tax rate.

Anyways I honestly think the effect will be people will stop paying themselves at the 1 million mark, or find loopholes. No one is going to throw such money away. It will be invested somewhere safe to goto their children or whatever, but not technically "income".
 
2012-08-08 09:25:48 AM  

MindStalker: 480K in taxes, leaving them with 760K, about a 50% effective tax rate.


Sorry, 33% tax rate.
 
2012-08-08 09:26:19 AM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Gunther: Surely we can all agree there's a farking middle ground, right?

I mean, in the one year of tax returns Mitt Romney released, he paid 13.9% tax. That's obviously too low - it's lower than what many people pay who earn 1/100th of what Mitt makes. 75%? That's probably high enough that it's going to be counter-productive. But what about 50% on incomes more than 1,000,000? It's less than we had in the 1950's, and I don't remember that being a decade troubled by a slow economy.

Capital gains and dividends on investments in corporations are already reduced by corporate income tax. You can't directly compare his 13.9% to taxes on earned income.

/commence with the posting of the obligatory Tom the Dancing Bug cartoon that, contrary to the intentions of the poster, actually supports my view.


Oh not this BS argument again
 
2012-08-08 09:26:19 AM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Anybody who thinks someone who makes $1.24m should pay 930k of it to the government is a horrible person no better than a mugger or corrupt politician.


anyone who fails this hard at reading and math must have their daddy buy their computer and internet service .
 
2012-08-08 09:26:38 AM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Anybody who thinks someone who makes $1.24m should pay 930k of it to the government is a horrible person no better than a mugger or corrupt politician.


As has been mentioned no on thinks that, and the 75% tax is only on income above a million Euros. So everything up to a million is taxed at the lower rate, only what's above a million would be taxed at 75.
 
Displayed 50 of 275 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report