France's top court:UNCONSTITUTIONAL to levy 75% tax on rich

[NoNukes]

That is what a primitive thinker like you would believe, yes.

Well, yes, Plasmaball. Both A and L are based on flawed concepts. Belief is simply personal.

I would consider religion to be the primitive concept while aetheism is personal.

Religion began as superstition and a way to explain what primitive man did not understand. I have evolved beyond that, obviously some people have not.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

French Court Says 75% Tax Rate on Rich Is Unconstitutional - Bloomberg

Even the French are getting a taste of the failed policies of Socialism, to include their courts which will not allow the insane Socialists of that country to rob the wealthy blind. The really telling thing is that although a multitude of business has fled France over the tax inequality, soaking the rich-- these same blind politicians don't care.. Jobs don't matter, only stealing money from the rich to fund their pet projects. Just as here in the United States, you could tax the rich 100% of their income and it would only help to fund the government for 3 months and NOT MAKE ONE single dent in the debt.

and? since when do you loons care about 'foreign law'?

especially you, wacko welsher.

and who is saying that we should tax anyone at 75%?

You were fired as a Moderator for good reason.. all anyone needs to do is read your lies and drivel. Had you bothered to actually read the thread you would have noted that Joe advocates for a 93% tax hike.. You're another LIAR who I'm done listening to. You're at up with self hatred because you've turned your back on your very own. You were the person selling out those who stood no chance.. Liberalism is your religion. You hate because you worship at the altar of FASCISM. This is my last post to you.. Good riddance.

 

[J.E.D]

Ole Josey isn't very bright.

Well, I'm at least bright enough to properly spell the name you choose to address me with.

What are you squealing about? I don't call you by any names, PERIOD. And for the last time, I DIDN'T WELCH on any bet and you know it. Just because you repeat it, doesn't make it true. I'm really sick of you liars on this forum impugning my character when it comes to that stupid bet.. I'm CERTAIN no one will ever wager or make another bet with any liberal on this forum after the way Conservatives have been treated and taunted since the election. You leftists have proven you're sore winners.

I wasn't talking to you, welsher.

 

[J.E.D]

Thats it?

Thats the best you haver Josey?

Be gone before I have somebody drop a house on you!!!


[/B]

Ole Josey isn't very bright.

Well, I'm at least bright enough to properly spell the name you choose to address me with.

Damn, you're dumb

 

[J.E.D]

French Court Says 75% Tax Rate on Rich Is Unconstitutional - Bloomberg

Even the French are getting a taste of the failed policies of Socialism, to include their courts which will not allow the insane Socialists of that country to rob the wealthy blind. The really telling thing is that although a multitude of business has fled France over the tax inequality, soaking the rich-- these same blind politicians don't care.. Jobs don't matter, only stealing money from the rich to fund their pet projects. Just as here in the United States, you could tax the rich 100% of their income and it would only help to fund the government for 3 months and NOT MAKE ONE single dent in the debt.

and? since when do you loons care about 'foreign law'?

especially you, wacko welsher.

and who is saying that we should tax anyone at 75%?

You were fired as a Moderator for good reason.. all anyone needs to do is read your lies and drivel. Had you bothered to actually read the thread you would have noted that Joe advocates for a 93% tax hike.. You're another LIAR who I'm done listening to. You're at up with self hatred because you've turned your back on your very own. You were the person selling out those who stood no chance.. Liberalism is your religion. You hate because you worship at the altar of FASCISM. This is my last post to you.. Good riddance.

welsher

 

[Skull Pilot]

The lowest and dumbest animal in the forest doesn't believe in a God. You are a primate. Hardly evolved, and barely cognizant of your own existence.

The rich are paying their fair share and it is not enough to fund the greed of people who want more.

We can't have that, can we?

35% is the lowest the rich have paid in our history, and our economy has worked better when they pay more.

The top Rate was 93% in the 1950's.. and that was a golden age of America.

Sorry, just because you are scared of death and need to tell yourself a fairy story about a nice man who will make you happy for all eternity, doesn't not make you more evolved than a monkey.

You are just putting more thought into your death fears...

You do realize that when the top rate was 90% that the bottom rate was over 20% don't you?

So if you're willing to double the bottom tax bracket then we can get back to the good old days.

 

[zakdavis]

The lowest and dumbest animal in the forest doesn't believe in a God. You are a primate. Hardly evolved, and barely cognizant of your own existence.

The rich are paying their fair share and it is not enough to fund the greed of people who want more.

We can't have that, can we?

35% is the lowest the rich have paid in our history, and our economy has worked better when they pay more.

The top Rate was 93% in the 1950's.. and that was a golden age of America.

Sorry, just because you are scared of death and need to tell yourself a fairy story about a nice man who will make you happy for all eternity, doesn't not make you more evolved than a monkey.

You are just putting more thought into your death fears...

You do realize that when the top rate was 90% that the bottom rate was over 20% don't you?

So if you're willing to double the bottom tax bracket then we can get back to the good old days.

what's strange is that there are people like me who are willing to do that. I have sacrificed already, I can do it again. There is more to the country then 'you', the way I see it.

 

[JoeB131]

Damn straight, I own the company and I take care of my employees. What entitles the government to more of it?

The fact if you didn't have a government, you wouldn't have a business?

Let's say we had no government. No garbage pickup outside your business. No electric unless you put a generator in the basement. No internet. No Police to protect your property. No running water.

And no legal recourse if your vendor who you saved a million dollars with sent you crap product and ran off with your money.

Let's say we get back to the actual question since I never advocated for no government nor no taxes.

Why should the government get a higher percentage when a risk pays off?

Because the risk wouldn't have paid off if there wasn't a government.

 

[JoeB131]

The lowest and dumbest animal in the forest doesn't believe in a God. You are a primate. Hardly evolved, and barely cognizant of your own existence.

The rich are paying their fair share and it is not enough to fund the greed of people who want more.

We can't have that, can we?

35% is the lowest the rich have paid in our history, and our economy has worked better when they pay more.

The top Rate was 93% in the 1950's.. and that was a golden age of America.

Sorry, just because you are scared of death and need to tell yourself a fairy story about a nice man who will make you happy for all eternity, doesn't not make you more evolved than a monkey.

You are just putting more thought into your death fears...

You do realize that when the top rate was 90% that the bottom rate was over 20% don't you?

So if you're willing to double the bottom tax bracket then we can get back to the good old days.

When the bottom rate was 20%, you didn't have sales taxes, the Social Security tax was only 1% instead of 6, there was no medicare tax.

Again, you guys keep trying to pretend the income tax is the only tax that exists when it isn't.

 

[JoeB131]

Splendid idea, let's try it.

Look, we produce 16 Trillion a year in Goods and services, and we only spend 4 trillion on the government. Please don't try to tell me that the money isn't there.

It appears Economics isn't something you've studied.

Ok, we confiscate all of the income starting with your customers. How will you get paid? How will your suppliers get paid?

Like all totalitarian lick-spittles, Joe seems to think that taxpayers and businesses can survive on nothing. He believes a tax rate of 93% is a good idea.

I'm serial!

You mean other than we had it for a period of 20 years, and we had the greatest period of our country's history?

 

[JoeB131]

The fact if you didn't have a government, you wouldn't have a business?

Even if that were true, how does it justify giving government a blank check to take whatever it wants? why should a business be on the hook for anything more than the cost of services government provides?

Let's say we had no government. No garbage pickup outside your business. No electric unless you put a generator in the basement. No internet. No Police to protect your property. No running water.

And no legal recourse if your vendor who you saved a million dollars with sent you crap product and ran off with your money.

Garbage in my neighborhood is picked up by a private company - Waste Management Services. The power utility is also a private company. Internet is also supplied by a private company - Comcast. Many localities also have private water and sewer companies. Many companies also have private security - especially large corporations.

So what are these essential services that businesses can't live without?



.

None of those things would exist without the government. Comcast doesn't maintain the internet, it just uses what hte government already established. Ditto with Com Ed or Waste Management. So argument fail from a crazy libertarian.

As I said, maybe what we need to do is throw a big fence around a useless state like Wyoming and dump all the libertarians and Teabaggers there. And just leave them when they resort to cannibalism.

 

[zakdavis]

The fact if you didn't have a government, you wouldn't have a business?

Even if that were true, how does it justify giving government a blank check to take whatever it wants? why should a business be on the hook for anything more than the cost of services government provides?

Let's say we had no government. No garbage pickup outside your business. No electric unless you put a generator in the basement. No internet. No Police to protect your property. No running water.

And no legal recourse if your vendor who you saved a million dollars with sent you crap product and ran off with your money.

Garbage in my neighborhood is picked up by a private company - Waste Management Services. The power utility is also a private company. Internet is also supplied by a private company - Comcast. Many localities also have private water and sewer companies. Many companies also have private security - especially large corporations.

So what are these essential services that businesses can't live without?



.

None of those things would exist without the government. Comcast doesn't maintain the internet, it just uses what hte government already established. Ditto with Com Ed or Waste Management. So argument fail from a crazy libertarian.

As I said, maybe what we need to do is throw a big fence around a useless state like Wyoming and dump all the libertarians and Teabaggers there. And just leave them when they resort to cannibalism.

our government hasn't established a whole lot when it comes to the internet, just the basics.

 

[Toro]

Apparently, even the French think 75% isn't anyone's "fair share."

One would think that when none other than France believes 75% is expropriation and a violation of one's fundamental rights, the American far leftists who thrive on resentment and envy might be a tad embarrassed. But alas, I doubt they have the capacity to be embarrassed.

 

[JoeB131]

Apparently, even the French think 75% isn't anyone's "fair share."

One would think that when none other than France believes 75% is expropriation and a violation of one's fundamental rights, the American far leftists who thrive on resentment and envy might be a tad embarrassed. But alas, I doubt they have the capacity to be embarrassed.

You guys need to stop reading too much into what was decided by this French court. It was the methodology they had a problem with, not the policy.

BBC News - French 75% income tax struck down by constitutional council

French millionaires would be well-advised to think twice before cracking open the champagne over the Constitutional Council's ruling.

The court emphatically did NOT say that the 75 per cent tax rate was too high.

No, the point on which the socialist government's flagship measure came unstuck was a technicality. In French jargon the new tax bracket for people earning more than a million euros had not been "conjugalised".

As framed, the tax band applied to individuals - not to households.

But in France, income tax is levied on households.

Therefore the provision breached the constitutional requirement that it be equitable for all.

The measure will almost certainly be back. All the government has to do is reframe and resubmit.

 

[Euroconservativ]

Yes 75% is way to high a tax rate, and really nobody is really advocating for it honestly. Bar one or two people, who will have zero impact on this debate.

Obama and company wanted to raise it back to the clinton era rates of 39% or a hike of 3%.

It's actually 39,6%, up from 35%. And you should also include state tax rates. California, Minnesota, Connecticut and many others are raising taxes on the "rich".

The french, german, british... tax rates are total tax rates.

75% rate for families and individuals who make €1 million or more. And the french Constitutional Court says that only individuals, not families, should pay. In my opinion it's an unfair tax rate but you can call it "a millionaire tax". Dems want higher taxes on families who make $250K. The vast majority in the top 2% are not millionaire.

 

[Toro]

Apparently, even the French think 75% isn't anyone's "fair share."

One would think that when none other than France believes 75% is expropriation and a violation of one's fundamental rights, the American far leftists who thrive on resentment and envy might be a tad embarrassed. But alas, I doubt they have the capacity to be embarrassed.

You guys need to stop reading too much into what was decided by this French court. It was the methodology they had a problem with, not the policy.

BBC News - French 75% income tax struck down by constitutional council

French millionaires would be well-advised to think twice before cracking open the champagne over the Constitutional Council's ruling.

The court emphatically did NOT say that the 75 per cent tax rate was too high.

No, the point on which the socialist government's flagship measure came unstuck was a technicality. In French jargon the new tax bracket for people earning more than a million euros had not been "conjugalised".

As framed, the tax band applied to individuals - not to households.

But in France, income tax is levied on households.

Therefore the provision breached the constitutional requirement that it be equitable for all.

The measure will almost certainly be back. All the government has to do is reframe and resubmit.

Like that ever mattered in France when it came to wealth distribution.

Oh, I have no doubt that your socialist brethren in France will get it passed, if they want. But given that Hollande has come under fire from the industrial groups to get growth growing again, lest France becomes another Italy, we'll see if he uses the ruling to back off. I give it a 50% chance he lets it drop.

 

[Euroconservativ]

Fact1: Romney won by 7 point margin among people living in households that make $50,000 or more

Fact2: Obama won by 28 point margin among people living in households that make less than $30,000

 

[JoeB131]

Like that ever mattered in France.

Oh, I have no doubt that your brethren socialists in France will get it passed, if they want. But given that Hollande has come under fire from the industrial groups to get growth growing again, lest France becomes another Italy, we'll see if he uses the ruling to back off.

France has finally learned to stand up to the plutocratic scum.

I hope we do in this country.

 

[JoeB131]

Fact1: Romney won by 7 point margin among people living in households that make $50,000 or more

Fact2: Obama won by 28 point margin among people living in households that make less than $30,000

yeah, so essentially, what you proved that after 30 years of making war on the working class, the GOP has lost them badly.

Here's the hint. the guy make 50K has just as many votes as the guy making 28K.

 

[SniperFire]

The lowest and dumbest animal in the forest doesn't believe in a God. You are a primate. Hardly evolved, and barely cognizant of your own existence.

The rich are paying their fair share and it is not enough to fund the greed of people who want more.

We can't have that, can we?

35% is the lowest the rich have paid in our history, and our economy has worked better when they pay more.

The top Rate was 93% in the 1950's.. and that was a golden age of America.

Sorry, just because you are scared of death and need to tell yourself a fairy story about a nice man who will make you happy for all eternity, doesn't not make you more evolved than a monkey.

You are just putting more thought into your death fears...

You do realize that when the top rate was 90% that the bottom rate was over 20% don't you?

So if you're willing to double the bottom tax bracket then we can get back to the good old days.

And those in the bottom 20% didn't have the write-offs.

Today's tax rates are far far far more 'progressive' than at anytime in the past, especially when you consider the fact that spending is 1000X more redistributive back to the regular folk today than at anytime in the past.