Well, there’s always a trade-off, and rarely a free lunch.
Reducing subsidies from large companies makes them less competitive against foreign companies, although I’m sure you can find at least some subsidies to cut.
Putting money to social services is often financed with debt, as the amounts needed cannot certainly be taken from corporate subsidies. The problem is, France is already deep in debt and the rates are high. Having France default would really hurt everyone in the EU and could cause a domino effect. I know this is not something Lemmy wants to hear, but maybe you need to.
against far-right sentiments
I hope they also show this in the presidential election. A fascist France would also be a terrible outcome for Europe.
Huh… You weirdly left out one of their suggestions completely. I wonder why. Literally their first suggestion, in the very first sentence of their comment, too.
Actually I just missed it, no need to wonder any longer. Yes, taxing the wealthy is a good idea. However, France already has a pretty high tax rate, so there’s a limit how far that can go and how much can be funded with it.
The percentage is the limit. that is not a number limit. it is essentially a structure to protect this exact damage to an economy we are feeling as a result of the the rich being unchecked and unhinged for far too long. there is only so far you can float an economy on so little until it collapses.
And…you missed it?
How??
it was their answer to you asking “i wonder what their answer is”
stop bringing down the comment curve. it is super trolly.
The percentage is the limit. that is not a number limit.
I don’t understand what this means. In fact, the whole paragraph makes little sense to me. But it sounds very confident.
And…you missed it? How??
Dude, I’m old and doing many things at once. Probably focused more on their social programs part. However, in the big picture it doesn’t change the fact that you can only increase taxes to a certain point. If that’s not enough, there’s not many places to look for left.
it was their answer to you asking “i wonder what their answer is”
Yes, and it was a decent answer. I would like to see some numbers how it would work. Being angry is easy, being careful about a country’s economy is not. And I’m in no way against the protests, I believe they have a good reason to do so. I’m just curious about the end game here.
stop bringing down the comment curve. it is super trolly.
yo we all busy doing a lot of things. And you’re not my job here. many other posts I’d rather be in than this one so dont talk like youre entitled to my time here.
Yes. I don’t know how many billionaires France has, but it’s in any case too many. They should be taxed heavily.
However, social programs are really really expensive. It would be interesting to see where the tax rates should be set in order to cover a meaningful increase in social spending.
I don’t know the French political scene enough to comment on this, but yes, sounds like politicians everywhere.
But even then there’s a problem. Imagine a politician cuts half their salary. If that story doesn’t make it to news, or people forget about it after 2 weeks, they lost half their salary for absolutely no gain. Leading by example can be difficult, if you don’t have the attention of the people.
Well, there’s always a trade-off, and rarely a free lunch.
Reducing subsidies from large companies makes them less competitive against foreign companies, although I’m sure you can find at least some subsidies to cut.
Putting money to social services is often financed with debt, as the amounts needed cannot certainly be taken from corporate subsidies. The problem is, France is already deep in debt and the rates are high. Having France default would really hurt everyone in the EU and could cause a domino effect. I know this is not something Lemmy wants to hear, but maybe you need to.
I hope they also show this in the presidential election. A fascist France would also be a terrible outcome for Europe.
Huh… You weirdly left out one of their suggestions completely. I wonder why. Literally their first suggestion, in the very first sentence of their comment, too.
Just a coincidence I’m sure.
Actually I just missed it, no need to wonder any longer. Yes, taxing the wealthy is a good idea. However, France already has a pretty high tax rate, so there’s a limit how far that can go and how much can be funded with it.
The percentage is the limit. that is not a number limit. it is essentially a structure to protect this exact damage to an economy we are feeling as a result of the the rich being unchecked and unhinged for far too long. there is only so far you can float an economy on so little until it collapses.
And…you missed it?
How??
it was their answer to you asking “i wonder what their answer is”
stop bringing down the comment curve. it is super trolly.
I don’t understand what this means. In fact, the whole paragraph makes little sense to me. But it sounds very confident.
Dude, I’m old and doing many things at once. Probably focused more on their social programs part. However, in the big picture it doesn’t change the fact that you can only increase taxes to a certain point. If that’s not enough, there’s not many places to look for left.
Yes, and it was a decent answer. I would like to see some numbers how it would work. Being angry is easy, being careful about a country’s economy is not. And I’m in no way against the protests, I believe they have a good reason to do so. I’m just curious about the end game here.
What’s a comment curve now?
yo we all busy doing a lot of things. And you’re not my job here. many other posts I’d rather be in than this one so dont talk like youre entitled to my time here.
Geez, no wonder the comment curve is going down hill with people this busy here.
Gotta rework how taxes are calculated. The mega rich just take out loans so they never have to pay capital gain tax. That loopholes gotta be closed
Yes. I don’t know how many billionaires France has, but it’s in any case too many. They should be taxed heavily.
However, social programs are really really expensive. It would be interesting to see where the tax rates should be set in order to cover a meaningful increase in social spending.
And an other problem is that they won’t think of showing the exemple.
All the effort for us, while they won’t consider cutting off one cent to thier own salaries or advantages.
I don’t know the French political scene enough to comment on this, but yes, sounds like politicians everywhere.
But even then there’s a problem. Imagine a politician cuts half their salary. If that story doesn’t make it to news, or people forget about it after 2 weeks, they lost half their salary for absolutely no gain. Leading by example can be difficult, if you don’t have the attention of the people.