French taxes keeping visiting boats away..

[poiu]

Originally Posted by Pilou

So, you compare France to North Korea ? For sure "your above remark is not really a well-reasoned response but an emotional one".

Now I trust that you never been to France neither to North Korea, also that you don't watch tv ! Guess what ? Go to Wikipedia and check out about France, North Korea, then compare both of the countries, I bet you would get the surprise of your life.

You should watch tv, at least once on a while

France is riddled with socialism and that is why they are having a go at superyacht boaters. Even more extreme socialism, the worst on the planet is the French ISF. It is a truly pernicious tax. Rognavald is 100% correct and he hasn't been to France and hasn't watched TV, but I have, a lot in both cases, so maybe I am permitted a view on this.

[Pilou]

Originally Posted by poiu

France is riddled with socialism and that is why they are having a go at superyacht boaters. Even more extreme socialism, the worst on the planet is the French ISF. It is a truly pernicious tax. Rognavald is 100% correct and he hasn't been to France and hasn't watched TV, but I have, a lot in both cases, so maybe I am permitted a view on this.

Whether you like it or not, France has a democratically elected President also a democratically elected Parliament, both elected by direct universal suffrage.

Our electoral system, in which both President and parliament are elected by direct universal suffrages, is very rare in the world, moreover the people of France recently voted overwhelmingly for the actual president and parliament.

One person's freedom ends where another's begins then whether you like our president, government and parliament or not, please respect the free expression of the will of the French voters, France doesn't need any lessons of democracy from you.

[poiu]

Originally Posted by Pilou

Whether you like it or not, France has a democratically elected President also a democratically elected Parliament, both elected by direct universal suffrage.

Our electoral system, in which both President and parliament are elected by direct universal suffrages, is very rare in the world, moreover the people of France recently voted overwhelmingly for the actual president and parliament.

One person's freedom ends where another's begins then whether you like our president, government and parliament or not, please respect the free expression of the will of the French voters, France doesn't need any lessons of democracy from you.

You are wrong to go on about democracy in this way. I haven't attacked French democracy, nor challenged anything about the process even. Less so, have I given lessons in democracy. Your post is a baseless rant.

[Vipe6]

It seems to be very easy to confuse plutocracy with democracy.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Pilou

Whether you like it or not, France has a democratically elected President also a democratically elected Parliament, both elected by direct universal suffrage.

Our electoral system, in which both President and parliament are elected by direct universal suffrages, is very rare in the world, moreover the people of France recently voted overwhelmingly for the actual president and parliament.

One person's freedom ends where another's begins then whether you like our president, government and parliament or not, please respect the free expression of the will of the French voters, France doesn't need any lessons of democracy from you.

Of course, the original comment wasn't comparing france to North Korea. It was simply stating that just because you don't live there doesn't mean you can't know something about a place but feel free to get indignant anyway.

[Pilou]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Of course, the original comment wasn't comparing france to North Korea. It was simply stating that just because you don't live there doesn't mean you can't know something about a place but feel free to get indignant anyway.

Indignant? Oh no, I am not ! Being a woman I have been through worse...
Just disappointed to see that a discussion what could have been interesting, quickly turned once again into political.
« à voir toujours le côté négatif des choses, la critique est aisée mais l'art est difficile ».

[valhalla360]

Too funny!!!!

Thank you for the laugh.

[Pilou]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Too funny!!!!

Thank you for the laugh.

Welcome to the Grand Opening

[rognvald]

[QUOTE=denverd0n;2451211]I have never heard anyone suggest that low taxes will "mend all ills." Never.[/Q

Don,
Are consumers better off with more money to spend or less? This solves 98% of any nation's problems. Is a nation healthier when its people can pay easily for the goods and services needed to live comfortably or are they better off struggling or living in poverty? Taxes will always be lower in a healthy economy since a greater number of people are paying into the system from Federal, State and local sales tax due to their robust consumption--not an increase in taxes. Sadly, Greece is the best example of this problem and why they are living off the graces of their Euro counterparts. Nobody is working and taxes are unconscionable. Of course, Don, this means that our brain dead politicos must also have a balanced budget and keep us out of costly, unnecessary wars. So, if you look at it from this perspective, it gets pretty close to being the vehicle to "mend all ills." And, of course, I haven't even mentioned the expansion of businesses, large and small due to low corporate taxes. Good luck and safe sailing.

[zboss]

[QUOTE=rognvald;2452374]

Originally Posted by denverd0n

I have never heard anyone suggest that low taxes will "mend all ills." Never.[/Q



Don,

Are consumers better off with more money to spend or less?

It depends on what they want to buy... new television that we pay taxes on... good... illegal drugs that we don't pay taxes on.... bad.

[denverd0n]

Originally Posted by rognvald

...it gets pretty close to being the vehicle to "mend all ills."

As they say, close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. And, I suppose, in thermonuclear warfare.

In any case, you probably come as close as I've seen to saying that lower taxes will "mend all ills," and you STILL didn't really say it. So "never" still stands for me.

In any case, yes, lower taxes are quite often a good thing. In general, most governments spend more than they need to, mainly because the money is so easy for them to get. They don't have to work for it, they just take it.

Still, societies need functioning governments, and governments require a certain amount of money to function. How much, of course, is the real question. And that is answered by an agreement on just what government should be doing. Except that people never seem to be able to agree on that.

Everyone wants the government to do the stuff that benefits them, and not to "waste" money on stuff that does NOT benefit them -- or worse yet (oh, the horrors!) stuff that benefits someone else. No one wants their particular tax deduction to be eliminated, but all the others that they don't qualify for... get rid of 'em!

In certain circumstances, lowering taxes can spur economic growth that will benefit everyone. Of course, included in that "everyone" are the wealthy, and no one ever thinks they should be allowed to benefit from anything. So there you have the dilemma.

There are no simple answers, and if you think you have come up with a perfect answer that is "simple," the reality is that it is probably just "simple minded." In any case, I have still never heard anyone say that lowering taxes will "mend all ills." But, of course, it is easier to criticize an absurd exaggeration like that one than it is to dispute serious arguments.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by denverd0n

In any case, you probably come as close as I've seen to saying that lower taxes will "mend all ills," and you STILL didn't really say it. So "never" still stands for me.

In any case, yes, lower taxes are quite often a good thing. In general, most governments spend more than they need to, mainly because the money is so easy for them to get. They don't have to work for it, they just take it.

It think the issue is govts tax & spend so much more than they should that the vast majority of the time, cutting taxes and programs is a good answer. Then people make the assumption that because 80-90% of the time the answer is to cut taxes & programs, that they jump to the conclusion that those proposing cutting taxes believe any and all tax cuts will "mends all ills".

Police, court system, military and a few other key items are best served by direct govt action. After that it starts getting sketchy.

Of course, we have the problem now that there is this massive govt system and while it should be pared way back, it's complicated and there are very serious short term issues in making large scale changes.

Take welfare: Historically, charities provided these services and did so better as they had the flexibility to do what is necessary to actually help people long term and it avoided those asking for help "expecting it as a right". But the govt has steadily pushed them out and taken over (sometimes funding the charity but enforcing govt rules in return for funding, effectively controlling them). If the govt suddenly stopped all welfare programs, there would be major impacts as the charities would need months or even years to reestablish their former roles. In the mean time, it would be chaos.

This is a huge risk for Europe where the govt has it's hands much deeper into the tax payers pockets. When they hit the wall and can't fund these programs, it will be much harder to extract themselves (not that the USA is in great position).

[rognvald]

Originally Posted by denverd0n

As they say, close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. And, I suppose, in thermonuclear warfare.

In any case, you probably come as close as I've seen to saying that lower taxes will "mend all ills," and you STILL didn't really say it. So "never" still stands for me.

In any case, yes, lower taxes are quite often a good thing. In general, most governments spend more than they need to, mainly because the money is so easy for them to get. They don't have to work for it, they just take it.

Still, societies need functioning governments, and governments require a certain amount of money to function. How much, of course, is the real question. And that is answered by an agreement on just what government should be doing. Except that people never seem to be able to agree on that.

Everyone wants the government to do the stuff that benefits them, and not to "waste" money on stuff that does NOT benefit them -- or worse yet (oh, the horrors!) stuff that benefits someone else. No one wants their particular tax deduction to be eliminated, but all the others that they don't qualify for... get rid of 'em!

In certain circumstances, lowering taxes can spur economic growth that will benefit everyone. Of course, included in that "everyone" are the wealthy, and no one ever thinks they should be allowed to benefit from anything. So there you have the dilemma.

There are no simple answers, and if you think you have come up with a perfect answer that is "simple," the reality is that it is probably just "simple minded." In any case, I have still never heard anyone say that lowering taxes will "mend all ills." But, of course, it is easier to criticize an absurd exaggeration like that one than it is to dispute serious arguments.

Don,
Generally speaking, there are no absolutes in life . . . other than death. Good luck and safe sailing.

[Shrubb]

Interesting comments... but by no means based on facts ! For information, these ugly "taxes" have nothing to do with French devotion to socialist trends, but are only the result of European laws and rules' mandatory enforcement in each EU country. Italy and Spain are just somewhat reluctant to comply quickly, and this is profitable for them for this season. But they will be obliged to apply the same rules soon. This is common in the Union where past sovereign behaviors still are alive, and the mega-yachts only follow the cheapest spot for their expenses. They will be back some day.
Huh, did CNN not explain that ?

[poiu]

Originally Posted by Shrubb

Interesting comments... but by no means based on facts ! For information, these ugly "taxes" have nothing to do with French devotion to socialist trends, but are only the result of European laws and rules' mandatory enforcement in each EU country. Italy and Spain are just somewhat reluctant to comply quickly, and this is profitable for them for this season. But they will be obliged to apply the same rules soon. This is common in the Union where past sovereign behaviors still are alive, and the mega-yachts only follow the cheapest spot for their expenses. They will be back some day.
Huh, did CNN not explain that ?

No they won't. They will base out of Gibraltar or Montenegro or Tunisia, particularly for big motor yachts if what you think will happen actually happens. Actually the social cost differences alone make Italy or Eastern Europe especially a worthwhile move for those that have small fuel bills but big wage bills.

France shoots itself in the foot again playing the socialist card. What you say is not true. This move is motivated by politics, not by a desire to follow rules.

Are they still trying to reduce the maximum working week to below 35 hours still?