taxes Cheers!
Hosted by Matthias

Introduction
Talking taxation is talking social project. Thus, one can understand the social project of the government through its tax reforms. It is for us to draw the outlines of another social project based on a different tax.
1. What is the social project of the government?
It is very readable behind his vision of taxation. The idea is simple: cut taxes of the richest and slashing public services. This is to allow more rich keep their money. They do not need public services because they can afford private services (private universities, private hospitals, etc.).
This project is currently in place: all the current reforms (schools, hospitals, social security, pensions, etc.) is to excuse the government deficit, and proposed spending cuts.
This view is not new: for 20 years there has been a steady decline in taxes in France but also in the U.S., England or Germany. It is the theory of "trickle down": if the rich are richer, the whole economy benefits from, so also the poorest. This is the argument constantly used to justify the tax shield for example. But this does not work like that.
What is the consequence of this policy in France? The widening deficits. Loss of 100 billion euros over 10 years (Mr Gilles Carrez calculation of the UMP). What does
N. Sarkozy? Reduce expenses. How? By reducing the number of officials. But as we look at the figures shows that the non-replacement of staff on a 2 that does retires saves as 500 million euros per year. While the reduction in VAT in the catering lose 3 billion per year. The record of N. Sarkozy is so negative!
The tax loopholes are also much more responsible for this deficit. 86% of tax loopholes benefiting the richest 10% in France. L. Bettencourt is currently imposed for example to 9% of its revenue from 400 million a year. So it does pay 40 million euros. The taxman has even paid 30 million euros through tax shield. France is therefore a tax paradise for those who can afford tax lawyers (tax planning). We laugh when Messrs Sarkozy, Brown and Obama tell us about the blacklist of tax havens, frowning.
2. What is our vision of society?
We must have a clear vision of taxation that we want and we fight to implement it. When will the demonstrations for a fairer tax system? What is this project? It's not very complicated: raising taxes on the richest to better distribute the wealth. In parallel with these new resources to build real public services that benefit everyone.
can even go further and say that this project will benefit all of society: the most modest as the easiest! A study published recently in Britain says that The benefits of greater equality are distributed throughout society and improve the health of everyone, not just the bottom of the ladder. In other words, regardless of income levels, we saw all the best that the country is egalitarian. This is true not only for the poor but also for other . For example, the hyper-rich in the U.S. have a life expectancy lower than the very wealthy Scandinavian countries. Why? Violence, the state health system or system education weigh heavily on the lives of every member of society.
But we must still ask whether such a project with a chance of being implemented. In the current French political system - that can be described as liberal oligarchy - the answer is unfortunately not. Because the government does not implement policies conducive to the general population, but a small minority of owners. Nevertheless, it is up to us to change things and bring this project because, as stated in the American historian Howard Zinn: It is very dangerous to wait for a savior, a leader who will arrange. Person at the top of the pyramid will arrange. These are not the initiatives of Presidents, the Congress or the Supreme Court that have improved society, but rather the actions of ordinary people.
Great themes
Francis noted that this view of taxation works mainly for taxes on income. If direct taxes actually go down for several years, indirect taxes and local taxes are increasing. The challenge is therefore mainly a revision of income tax to redistribute wealth.
Pierrot also notes that must above all be angry about the use of taxes. He is facing the lavish spending of our president and cuts in public services.
The issue of regionalization of taxes was also raised. Should we regionalize the collection and use taxes? The example of the transformation of RMI in RSA is recalled. In addition, the national framework allows you to play the solidarity between regions.
Dominique wondered why the man wants fewer share with others, and why companies are becoming less supportive. Values that accompany the rise of capitalism since two centuries and the resurgence of neo-liberalism since the early 1980's are not for nothing.
Francis said that talk about taxation and redistribution of wealth is ultimately to consider how best to operate the current economic system. On this subject the vision of the American entrepreneur Garrett Gruener (below) is interesting. Many entrepreneurs are calling for a better distribution of wealth in order to stimulate consumption, hence the production and growth. He comes to rest not on the growth of household indebtedness, but a real increase wages. This is what had set up Henry Ford in the early 20th century when he realized that his workers were also potential consumers of its products. The rise of low wages is clearly a goal but the beginning of the twenty-first century, we must also raise the question of ecology. A new policy "Fordist" would be compatible with preserving the environment? Even if, as outlined by Hervé Kempf ( How rich are destroying the planet ) it is mainly the consumption patterns of the very rich that harm the environment by spreading to the middle class.
References
Three recent issues of
the bottom if I'm on this topic 28, 29 and 30 September. Worth listening here.
You can also read an interesting article published in Courrier International on September 30 about the United States or the tax debate is also relevant. Article here.
0 comments:
Post a Comment