Complaining of gross injustice at home, the gross Gerard Depardieu left for Moscow – a Napoleonic choice, I fear. We’ll see (as my 6-year-old granddaughter is wont to observe). But soft, what other luminary at yonder port of entry breaks cover? It is not Rosy-fingered Dawn but Carla and Nicolulla with a couple of sons, migrating to London – allegedly. Now I can see why Carla might fancy it – some of her ‘best friends’ are natives – but will the little fella really let a high tax-rate drive him out of (one of) his ancestral home(s)? I can only applaud his good taste if he does.
Boadicea's Chariot 
Oh come, come! How could anyone possibly want to leave France with its rude waiters, overrated food, over-expensive fizzy wine, surly natives and eye-watering taxes.
OZ
While I’m enough of a ‘Socialist’ to deplore the fact that the poorer members of Society pay proportionally a great deal more of their income in taxes than the super-rich – I am not in favour of taking more than 50% of anyone’s ‘income’ in taxes.
However, it really p***s me off that the present economic maelstrom, which has been caused by those who already had more than they needed and who sought to have even more, is being paid for by those who are struggling to keep their heads above the poverty line and those who have worked to have a little more to foot the bill for their greed.
I can see why those who will be hit by the new tax in France will run – they can afford to do so – how jolly convenient for them.
I like the Rolling Stones’ music, but as far as I’m concerned Jagger should never have been given any British award. Likewise, Depardieu’s French awards should be withdrawn… if anyone accepts the ‘honours’ of their country they should accept the laws and taxes of their homeland… and stay. They should not turn their back on those who supported them and made them who they are.
OZ: don’t forget regular strikes and a bureaucracy that makes Heathrow look efficient and pleasant.
Boadicea: poorer members of society also proportionally require a great deal more in the way of
social benefits. In some instances they pay no taxes at all.
As for the economic maelstrom… Which point of origin do you mean? Europe? The euro skewed
economic realities for a number of years and interest rates were set to benefit France and Germany at
the expense of Ireland and the countries of the South. That was a product of political stupidity, not the wealthy. The US? Banks were coerced by the government to make loans to people based on their ethnicity, not their ability to re-pay. The credit boom was in no small part based on that. Furthermore, if people would have broadly acted more responsibly the economy would not have gone as poorly as it did. Was there was a reason why over 60pc of Spaniards had 2 mortgages to pay because they wanted a second house even if they couldn’t actually afford it? I take issue with blaming this on artificially-created groups of people, especially when the groupings tend to be highly volatile. If someone broke laws then she or he should be punished under the law. If someone did not break the law that person should not be punished because someone with a similar income did.
France is learning a very difficult lesson now, one that Hollande should have grasped before he pushed through the laws he did. Capital goes where it is comfortable, it goes where it is welcomed. If France penalises people for being successful they can simply board a flight to some other part of the world where they feel more welcome. Companies can easily move where economic conditions are easier. Seventy-five per cent tax? Switzerland, Germany, the Netherlands, etc. have lower burdens and also pleasant qualities of life. The UK has a much lower burden and a lot of strong points. Because of this Hollande will fail and perhaps take France with him, because of this Obama will fail and take the US with him — though the latter is no great loss.
A very interesting comment, Christopher. It’s nothing new that French celebs like Depardieu live outside France, Boadicea, even before Hollande arrived. There has always been this trepidation about any socialist government in France, taxing the rich but with nothing to show for it at the end. Depardieu stuck out longer than many.
Christopher, Obama’s speech this week emphasised it is the People who deserve to benefit from the wealth of the USA. Is there something wrong with that?
Yes, there is. It’s a rough, tough world out there and the Devil take the hindmost as I would cull the slowest boar, rabbit or deer. Natural selection and all that.
OZ
Janus: the point is that the “people”, roughly half the population, pay no taxes yet they want more hand-outs from the government. That is, they want other people to give them a better quality of life.
People who took mortgages they could not reasonably hope to pay expect those who sacrifice to pay their mortgages to bail them out. The government takes money from those who work and gives it to those who prefer to not even seriously try finding work. In Germany, for example, people have to work to receive public benefits unless they’re well and truly disabled. Even if it is only a four-hundred euro job they are still expected to do something with their lives. In the USA they are not. In fact, if they do take a part-time job while looking for a better position they will not receive any help at all. My father’s younger brother had a stroke early last year that left him disable. He worked in well-paying jobs and paid a lot of money in taxes. Despite being disabled, the state refused to help him for 11 months. They almost lost electricity and could not buy food. They had to beg for help from family and friend. Yet he always worked, his problem was a real one yet they told him to starve for months. That’s America, Janus, and absolute and utter disaster. The minute Americans get any sort of help from the government they stop working. The entire mentality is a lazy one, an entitled one. Obama is just playing on it in order to secure positions for his friends.
Christopher, I was thinking of you today, CBS reported -32F in Minnesota, I’ve never been in minus anything, I might have been years ago, but here the coldest it gets is perhaps +4C.
Hope you are well.
Arriving in London eh?
That explains the French stink!
I was once in -40 in Maine, couldn’t breathe literally, was marooned inside whilst it lasted and left ASAP!
Never been back!
Of course ‘Capital goes where it is comfortable, it goes where it is welcomed.’ And any idiot knows that – however, since most ‘Socialist Governments’ consist of idiots it is hardly surprising that they continue to think that they can raise money by imposing tax at 75%.
Everyone pays tax – directly or indirectly – whether they are on benefits or not. The increase in VAT in the UK from 17.5% to 20% weighed more heavily on those at the lower end of the economic structure than those at the top.
While I agree that the ‘benefit system’ encourages those who do not want to work to laze around, I don’t want a society where the devil takes the hindmost. It cannot be beyond the wit of any Government to set up a system which provides a safety-net for those unable to provide for themselves and a hard time for those who are unwilling to do so.
I also happen to believe that no one can, in all honesty, truly earn some of obscene sums that are paid to company directors, pop-stars or sportsmen.
Boadicea: VAT, or GST as it is known/applied in other locations, is a highly regressive tax. As you say it hurts those most who can least afford it. By taxes I meant direct income taxes.
Germany’s social system is reasonably efficient and encourages people to be useful. Every effort is made to find people jobs that match their qualifications and if none can be found to train them for other positions. It’s possible to have this sort of system but government will often exploit what might well have initially been a well-intended set of policies to create a dependent class owing them their votes. More often than not this is the case.
How much can one truly “earn”? Who has the right to decide that? It’s a symptom of larger social and economic malaise, not the cause of it. Furthermore, is it even relevant how high some incomes are? Say I go back to Germany and earn 40,000.00 euro yearly. That’s enough to give me a comfortable quality of life with something left over at the end of the month if I’m not utterly foolish to tide away for harder times. That someone might earn 12,000,000.00 euro doesn’t mother me. In fact, good on them. Is it excessive? Perhaps, but they’re more likely to do something useful for the economy with that money than the government. Their private jets keep others employed, their holidays keep others employed, their going to restaurants keeps people employed, their shopping trips keep people employed, their fleets of luxury cars keep people employed. I would not want that sort of life but can still appreciate that it does in the end keep more money circulating where it needs to than say, 2 million euros for a new government building or a study of wilted lettuce.
Soutie: it’s been bitterly cold, horrendously cold. I am looking forward to the coming of spring. It’s unbearable.
Christopher
The problem is that Governments have to raise money and it can’t all be raised by income tax… otherwise those who can flee do!
It amuses me (and annoys me too!) that most Socialist Governments do not seem to understand that over-taxing can be counter-productive. The last State Government here doubled the Stamp Duty and then wondered why the property market went flat… the present mob have reduced it, and will, no doubt, end up collecting more from the tax than the last lot.
I think I do have the right to complain about the wages of those who are paid by me as a tax-payer, or those who are paid out of my ever-rising bills for life’s necessities such as food, water and fuel.
It doesn’t bother me that Apple makes enormous profits from those gullible enough to spend their money on products that are designed to be obsolete before they hit the market – I can, and do choose not to contribute to those profits… but, I have little or no choice about where to get my water, gas and electricity.
Your comment that those with ‘lots of money’ keep the economy running also applies to those with limited incomes.
The problem lies with the fact that democracy panders to the lowest common denominator. The political party that offers the most to the least able members of society is the one that is likely to win power. Western nations are in a race to destroy the economic base, not to mention the moral fibre, of their populations, in the pursuit of political power. Churchill was wrong about democracy. China has a better system: strong leadership with the good of the entire country as its goal, not the good of the weakest members (or the richest, for that matter). I suggest.
Boadicea: there is no perfect solution, although my opinion is that people should only be obliged
to pay modest amounts of taxes but in turn should be, by law, obliged to look out for their own needs as much as possible. If people are truly poor and truly cannot help themselves then of course there should be a safety net, but I think it should be an absolute last option. People should have their own pension plans and not rely on the state, people should have health insurance but the single-payer method has proven itself problematic.
My main concern is that a law that is well-intended will be written poorly and then exploited by self-serving politicians to benefit themselves at the cost of everyone else. More often than not that is the case.
Sipu: your view of China is based on what it in theory should be, not what it in practise is.
Wealthy Chinese do largely as they please and the vast majority have little recourse. The country as a whole? Please. When Chinese with money and education have the chance they tend to leave the country. Many affluent parents send their children to the West to study and hope that they stay there. Don’t be too romantic about China. It’s easy to fall for that trap, but it’s still an illusion.
Denmark is a good example of over-taxing. Wages have spiralled upwards to render manufacturing uncompetitive. Jobs are disappearing abroad. The welfare system is abused. More than half of all jobs are in the public sector. Result: declining GDP.
Sipu, you cannot seriously support the self-appointed Chinese government? I’d like to see a genuine survey of the population’s living standards and ‘freedoms’.
There is a suggestion in today’s Le Figaro that the French government is now thinking of abandoning the 75% top tax rate. It was of course voted down by the upper house a few months ago and the government originally promised to rework and reintroduce the bill. An attack of sanity perhaps?
The French government is also postponing the new rules on breathalysers in private cars. These were to be compulsory from last July – just in time to catch out British tourists – and I bought quite a few to give to friends travelling through France. I presume that the rate of drink-driving has not decreased enough to warrant continuing this experiment.
I have not been in France these past twenty years and sincerely hope not to return any time soon.
“Frog bogs are the pits.” © Christina O.
OZ
Christopher
I think you should talk to my mother – a devout Conservative from the day she was born into what was, even then. considered poverty. Her ambition was to be able to pay her way until the Saturday after she died – and she has achieved that. But, she saw what happened when a ‘safety-net’ was the last resort and would never want a return to those times regardless of whether the present system allows people to choose not to provide for themselves. We don’t always agree, but I find the attitude that people should sink or swim on their own to be quite heartless.
Fine to expect people to sort out their own pension plans – but not everyone has the knowledge and ability to do that and there are no safeguards against unscrupulous financial companies, who are out to take what they can and give nothing in return. Governments should ensure that what people pay into their pension funds are protected.
I also find it quite unacceptable that Governments should not provide basic medical care. This falls under my heading of ‘circumstances that one cannot predict’ and, as such, should be covered by the ‘safety-net’ principle. I do, however, find the UK’s NHS policy of providing just about everything free quite appalling! Surely people could be expected to pay something towards their prescriptions, the batteries for their hearing aids and other such stuff!
The problem, as I see it, is that there is an ‘all-or-nothing’ mentality. The left want to give ‘all’ and the right want to give ‘nothing’… A better balance is needed.
Too many people in Western Societies have been taught that they have the right to have all the goodies of the modern world without making the necessary effort to attain them. It is not surprising that those who have worked to get what they own are resentful of those who have not. What is needed is a bit of education, backed up by Government policy, to make it perfectly clear that one needs to make an effort to acquire more than the basic necessities of life.
Boadicea: I should clarify my point. In my view there should be compulsory pension plans.
Say, 10pc of income should automatically go to a private pension account with matching contributions
by the employer. If one’s pension is not enough then there should be a supplementary pension from
the state in order to maintain a certain quality of life. That way those who always worked but never earned much would not be impoverished in their final years. But if one’s pension is enough to live comfortably then there is no need for an additional pension from the state. I also think that pensions should be exempt from taxation and if a pensioner wishes to work part-time it should not be discouraged.
As for healthcare… There is hardly a developed country in which basic medical care is not provided for those who need it. Again, Germany’s model appears to be the best. No one will ever have to go without healthcare. Because of demographic trends social benefits are being pared but not slashed brutally. A doctor’s visit will now cost 10 euro, for example, and for some time now those wanting more visits to dentist or treatments not absolutely necessary can purchase supplementary private insurance.
My point is not to toss the poorest of society aside, to condemn them to Dickensian squalor. My point is that those who can take care of themselves should be obliged to take care of themselves and those who cannot can still receive help — not like, say, those with a decent income who go to charities to get free food in order to save up their money to buy more plonk. (I’ve seen that a lot)
Janus: there is a genuine survey of Chinese views on their living standards and contentment with government. Most young Chinese who finish their university education abroad never return to China.
Almost all young Japanese return to Japan, most young Brazilians return to Brazil, most young Germans, Britons, etc. return to their home countries after finishing their degrees but not Chinese, Indians, or Russians. It’s not what people say in official surveys, it’s how they vote with their feet.
China is getting stronger. More and more Chinese are emerging from poverty. The West is getting weaker. More and more people are declining into debt, poverty, physical and mental decay, not to mention decadence.
Sipu, you may be right at the makro level, but´”More and more Chinese are emerging from poverty?” Link?
Janus : http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/china/overview
I draw your attention to the last para.
“China’s 12th Five-Year Plan (2011-2015) forcefully addresses these issues. It highlights the development of services and measures to address environmental and social imbalances, setting targets to reduce pollution, to increase energy efficiency, to improve access to education and healthcare, and to expand social protection. Its annual growth target of 7 percent signals the intention to focus on quality of life, rather than pace of growth. “
Sipu: there is a term for many young Chinese: 小皇帝, little emperors. The only children of affluence spoilt from the time they were born and never having to take care of themselves, always having things handed to them. Utterly helpless, utterly useless. They cannot work, they cannot take care of themselves. They do not know how. They cannot cook, they cannot clean, they cannot even think — that’s all been done for them.
Decadence? Debt? Please, do you know how many Chinese are mired in debt? Do you know how much debt provinces have? Is the Chinese economy growing? Yes. Is the country growing stronger? Yes. Does the country have profound problems that run the risk of undermining its rise? Yes. The problem with many is that they take everything at face value — never the best in the West, utterly asinine in the East. But then some people want to think things are the way they seem so they never question it.
By the way, the most decadence I’ve ever seen was in China. While there I once began laughing hysterically after seeing yet another Southern California-style neighbourhood. My friend, a Chinese, asked me what was so funny — I told him that China had managed to go from grinding poverty and deprivation to decadence within one generation and complimented him on China’s ability to grow degenerate even faster than the West, after all, we at least had a few solid generations!