I already pay quite lot of tax in Australia (more than 40%), i am not willing to be taxed 2 times. I didnt wanted to vote since i am not in france anymore but i will rush to be able to vote Sarko.
I have not yet found a lot of details, but considering that this is what the US does (taxing all citizens, even when abroad), I fail to see how our expatriates should complain. The key, of course, is the offset with local taxes - if you left France to go to a low tax jursdiction, you will lose out; if you went to a "normal" country (and remember that France has one of the lowest income tax burden of all industrialised countries * ), there should be no impact.
* note: I'm talking about income tax, not overall taxation, of course. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
There are more than 2Million of expat, and this kind of stuff is likely to make the difference between 51% and 49%.
i forecast a Sarko-Bayrou at the 2nd round.
Count on the right to pointlessly tickle the selfish bone of expatriates. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
the SMIC at 1500€ "when we can" .... how is that to be financed ? within 5 years, it's the normal inflation indexed increase.
free healthcare for the youth under 25 ? isn't it already free ?
pensions paid every month, Hallelujah !
obviously a palette of small measures, to satisfy every little complaint, and thus avoiding the big questions :
how tho finance future pensions, unemployment, defense, Europe etc... not a word...
rethorics, rethorics, rethorics
the NYT isn't maybe that wrong, Besancenot seemed quite happy on France Europe Express ad Laguiller salured her "courage" the other day...
pauvre France... doux pays de mon enfance
vote Bayrou, so we don't get LePen again in the second run...
"mettre en place un impôt citoyen que paieraient tous les Français même lorsqu'ils ont décidé de délocaliser tout leur argent à l'extérieur" et de "lutter contre cette manière de se désintéresser de ce qu'est la France quand on est Français".
Les taxes existantes doivent évoluer pour mieux appliquer le principe pollueur-payeur : taxation des émissions de gaz à effets de serre, taxation de l'eau à son juste prix, taxation européenne du kérosène pour les vols intérieurs, etc.
L'objectif est d'agir réellement sur les comportements, sans pour autant nuire à la compétitivité mondiale des entreprises européennes. La fiscalité écologique mise en place en Suède depuis 1990 est un bon exemple de politique efficace. Je me battrai pour que nous avancions dans cette direction.
Bayrou the Taxes are to be fair and thus nor forcing valuable citizens to leave the country.
For the socialists, They need money and the Expats are an untapped source tax.
the proposed Segolian 5% increase on pensions for the category "low pensions" is an insult to that category. It gives them 20€ more a month !!! Bayrou proposes 90% of the smic (minimum wage). So they don't have to queue at 80 for charity. This problem which is a remnant of the prewar generation was solved in Sweden in the sixties through the ATP reform there. It's a shame that in this country (France) elderly and widows that have been working all their lives still earn 300-600€ a month.
Everybody has an ecologic fiscality on its program since they signed the "Hulot pact". Except Lepen of course and the far left.
How people can buy this Segomagogery is beyond my understanding. It's Mitterand revisited, the man that made France lose 20 years of evolution towards a better society.
Mitterrand did a lot to bring France to a better society. Not just on the social and cultural fronts, but also actually on the economic and industrial fronts. Nationalisations saved whole chunks of French industry which were basically bankrupt. The French State managed the terrible restructurings of the steel and coal industries. The increasingly destabilizing "competitive devaluation" policies of the earlier years were weaned off. Major steps forward were made towards a more unified Europe.
Even if you ignore the rest, just for the European bits, Mitterrand was a great President. The picture of Kohl and him in Verdun is enough.
In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
On the home front :
Every asshole has a good side. If Nixon hadn't been caught on Watergate, he'd probably ended as the great president that ended the Vietnam war and made the big opening towards China...
What pension catastrophe? That's just a lie pushed by the insurance industry to put their hands on the biggest loot of all. In every single country. We managed to get from 0% to 10% of GDP, we'll manage to get to 15% in a few decades as our populations get older. Incremental change will be enough.
unemployment and precarity sailed away, and Mitterand didn't care : "I've tried every mean"
When in doubt about how to criticize France, bring up unemployment. Yep, it's an issue. It was a choice by a generation, the babyoomer generation to protect itself and pull the ladder behind it. Once that choice was made, it was really hard to undo, and we're paying this - the young people are, anyway. But other countries made other categories bear the brunt in other ways. France has made the choice to let people stop work at an early age - older people work much less. Is that really such a bad thing?
nationalisations ? you're kidding. He had to give up 3 years after. Anyway it was a dead end.
all the modernisation that France needed, education, universities, research postponed for the future. 1994 I started to surf on the Internet in Sweden, every civil servant had a computer. In France it was a cool gimmick shown on fairs.
And we built nuclear energy, high speed trains and other bits of useful infrastructure which might alos oturn out to be usefum in the near future... And we had the minitel in the mid 80s, 10 years before anyone else had anything approahcing it for the services it provided. Different sorts of modernisation.
One model is not so absolutely superior to the other that you should treat the other so contemptuously. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
- of course France didn't stand still during the Mitterand years, but many of the achievements you cite (nuclear, TGV etc.. were started before Mitterand).
This is not the fight between two models - a "socialist one" and a "liberal one". Both presidencies Mitterand AND Chirac have failed, mostly for the same reasons, the unwillingness to take the tough decisions that all paradigm shifts include. Same in Bush's America : rather keep my little cosy power than piss off some privileged groups at whatever level of the society you may find them.
This is what this election is about : repeating the mistakes until final catastrophy or find a new way. One thing is sure : neither Sarko or Sego are the right answer. They are going to keep the monarchic French system in place and appease it with postures and spraying of small measures, another words for band-aids. Then they will be "astonished" if Marine LePen/DeVilliers win the presidency 2012.
Could France have done more along these lines, given the big differences between France and these "nordic" countries? Was the problem just one of lack of imagination and/or will?
neither Sarko or Sego are the right answer. They are going to keep the monarchic French system in place and appease it with postures and spraying of small measures, another words for band-aids.
If you could "design" the perfect policy platform for a candidate in this presidential race, what would it look like? Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.
While I like his vision and ambitions for a "union of Europe to change the world" and "to defend our model of society (...) our social values in particular", could you elaborate how his proposed policies would address the problems and concerns you have with Sarkozy's and Royal's "rhetoric" (I am doubtful you would agree to call them "proposals").
For example, according to the article you diaried:
Pointing out the amazing level of the French debt, he invited his supporters "to ask explanations from Nicolas Sarkozy and Ségolène Royal, who every evening in their speeches promise tens of billion euros additional expenditure".
So, what is Bayrou's position on French debt, and how to resolve the problem?
What does he propose to do about unemployment, pensions, and other issues that you have identified in other comment as urgent issues for France?
(I will post this comment over in your diary as well, where it may in fact be more relevant.) Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.
the Mitterand model is not a social-democratic model nor even a socialist one. It's a "I keep the power to myself-model at any price". Thereof the contempt.
Your (not unreasonable) contempt for the man makes you ignore the economic policies that were pursued.
On the pensions front - of course there is a demographic evolution. Of course the system will need to adapt to it. All I am saying is that it can be done via fine tuning and tinkering over the years, as we've done over the past 40 years to adapt to new population distributions and needs. There will be a combination of slightly higher contributions by workers, slightly longer years of work, and slightly lower pensions, comapred to what have been, but as productivity keeps on increasing, we'll be able to oafford the system and not leave anybody behind.
One thing - on the public pensions thing. I'll let you argue this with my father, who has a simple argument. As a professor, he has had for his whole life a lower salary than his qualifications could have gotten him in the private sector. In return, he got a safe job and a safe pension. You may make a different choice, but it was a deal, a full package, and it is quite unfait to change one part of the package after the fact - and after one party to the deal has already given all it was supposed to.
As to employment/unemployment, the main difference between France and the Nordic countris is the employment rate of the seniors - much higher in Scandinavia. Unemployment has gone to pretty high leves in Finland (above 15%), Denmark (10%) and even Sweden (8%) as well.
You mention Ericsson and Nokia. But the reverse point is that having just one such company is enough to distort all statistics relative to the very small countries that host such a large company. Alcatel or Airbus is not enough, on its own, to have an impact on French macro-economic statistics. Ericsson and Nokia are. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
gave green light to the bombing of the Rainbow Warrior supported a whole parallell secret family on tax payers money illegally wiretaped journalists, politicians and known people lied about his health and published faked health reports didn't act in time regarding the Rwanda genocide despite all the signs had two suicides during his presidency, one prime minister and the other one, a confident, suicided with two bullets (!) in his head (at the Elysée).
Yes, the monarchic presidency is probably not the best feature of the French system, and Mitterrand sure adopted the ways he was criticising two decades earlier....
And indeed, I have a lot of admiration for the transparency, openness and simplicity of the Nordic governments - and that is certainly one feature that I'd like to see adopted here. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
if i have to be taxed because of my citizenship i want that only those who pay taxes ( ONLY 49% of the population) could votes and ofcourse foreigners who pay taxes in france should get their citizenship automatically.
it is ridiculous, i will go to the consultat tomorrow.
From the discussion on my blog:
total VAT paid divided by income tax in France: 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 1.94 2.01 2.12 2.34 2.41 2.32 2.24 2.27 2.44 2.42 2.63 2.68
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 1.94 2.01 2.12 2.34 2.41 2.32 2.24 2.27 2.44 2.42 2.63 2.68
VAT is 145 billions, income tax is 55 billions in 2005.
And you're the one who's whining? LOL.
If it is not as painful as it sounds, you can still get involved to improve the system. Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.
