Is it any wonder why.....

[deema]

France is IMO one of the most racist intolerant countries I’ve worked in. How very different people’s perceptions can be.

 

[paulrbarnard]

or encourages them to try to make more? Has anybody ever been deterred from making money by taxation? I doubt it - except at the bottom end where things like business rates can break a small company

It's an old and oft repeated argument, but in fact nobody has ever demonstrated that these people move about, except for the odd exception. We don't find immigrants from high tax regimes coming here in droves, nor vice versa.

It's been the basis of varied tax rates from day one. Nothing to do with the hard left. The hard right have to tax too and tax the wealthier higher, albeit reluctantly!

Nobody suggests that. It's a "reductio ad absurdam".

The problem is the higher the rate the higher the incentive not to pay it through avoidance or simply leaving the country. They can afford to after all. As pointed out before you then loose all that contribution.

 

[mwinfrance]

France is IMO one of the most racist intolerant countries I’ve worked in. How very different people’s perceptions can be.

You are making the same mistake as JimJay..Because I commented on Saudi Arabia, and later on the UK, does not mean that I think that any other country ( Ireland* whose passport I thankfully hold* , or France , where I now live ) , is perfect, far from it.But neither Ireland, nor France ( despite what you might see about Marine's private party/ family business ) is is any danger of voting to leave the EU based in large part on racism.Not all leave voters in the UK brexit vote were racist, but all racists were leave voters.
France is not just metropolitan France ( there is indeed racism here in the North and the Mediterranean coastal areas( I lived in the latter for many years ) and in Paris, but in the rest of "metro' France" that is not so much the case. there is however a strong anti-muslim vote in many areas. Marine gets the anti muslim vote..muslim is not a race, it is a religious / political philosophy. One can become Muslim, or one can renounce being a Muslim, as one can become a Christian, or renounce it etc. One can neither become black or brown or etc , nor can one renounce being black or brown etc. France is a laîc society, political islam ( or any political religion ) is incompatible with it, and so the laîcity is fiercely defended, unfortunately Marine and her ilk are seen by many of the easily influenced "hard of thinking" as a bulwark to defend a laîc society.Particularly as the extreme right in France is also highly catholic at least it's leaders claim to be so publicly. Much like the Trumpists and other Republicans in the USA.
In the various non-metro french areas ( outside "L' Hexagone" ) such as Guyane, Martinique, Nouvelle Caledonie, Polynesia etc the majority population is non white.There is constant exchange between them and mainland France, constant "brassage" ( mixing ) of populations and races and cultures. There is also an entirely bi-lingual major state TV station ( French and German ) Arte here, run by France and Germany together, whereas the UK mass media has always been english language only, with a "sop" to Wales.

*I also have British citizenship, my passport expired in 2018, i have no intention of , nor need to renew it. My Irish one and my membership of the EU allows me to live , work, and travel to far more countries and places than a British one does.Including being able to live and work in the Caribbean, Indian Ocean, and Polynesia etc, no visas nor permits required.

My apologies for multiple edits, some are due to correcting typos, others are due to a bug with certain forum software and firefox used on an AZERTY keyboard in some linux systems, where certain key combinations result in posting instead of the desired character appearing.

I've lived ( and worked ) in many counties ( including the USA ) so far this one ( including the non "metro" non "L'hexagone" areas ( while not being perfect ) suits me the best.

 

[Jacob]

The problem is the higher the rate the higher the incentive not to pay it through avoidance

Need better law and more collection. More effort is made over benefit fraud which is tiny compared to tax dodging

or simply leaving the country.

Seems to be a myth. They can't take land and property with them anyway. There is no evidence except for a few mega rich. They also own all the media and tell everybody, loudly and repeatedly, that high taxes are bad! Quelle surprise!!

 

[paulrbarnard]

Need better law and more collection. More effort is made over benefit fraud which is tiny compared to tax dodging

Seems to be a myth. They can't take land and property with them anyway. There is no evidence except for a few mega rich. They also own all the media and tell everybody, loudly and repeatedly, that high taxes are bad! Quelle surprise!!

We have been here before. The problem is we are not talking about illegal avoidance. If you have the money your accountant can legally avoid a lot of tax for you, saving significantly more than they charge. There is a whole industry behind this. If taxation was as simple as you earn X you pay Y% it would be fine and you certainly wouldn’t need to put the rates up to anything like you suggest.
You can’t compare this to benifit fraud which IS illegal.

Property, land etc has nothing to do with it. They will keep that anyway. A heck of a lot of that is already owned by non dom investors.

 

[Jacob]

We have been here before. The problem is we are not talking about illegal avoidance.

Some is , some isn't, a lot is about bending the rules as far as possible.

If you have the money your accountant can legally avoid a lot of tax for you, saving significantly more than they charge. There is a whole industry behind this.

We need a whole industry collecting it.

If taxation was as simple as you earn X you pay Y% it would be fine and you certainly wouldn’t need to put the rates up to anything like you suggest.
You can’t compare this to benifit fraud which IS illegal.

Not until proven, just like tax. Under payment is a bigger issue with benefits.

Property, land etc has nothing to do with it. They will keep that anyway.

Not if it's taxed

A heck of a lot of that is already owned by non dom investors.

Forms of tax avoidance
The weird thing about these discussions is that so many people chip in on behalf of the tax avoiders and promote the idea of low taxes. They don't seem to see the connection between tax and public services and believe the nonsense about them being unaffordable. Killing the goose which lays the public service golden eggs! NHS, education, transport, public health etc etc about half the UK economy.

 

[clogs]

judges and politions or those at the top mostly live behind high walls and big gates......
things would change if they lived near child rapists and the stabbing yuf.......

Paying taxes I have accepted but 50m cycles lanes and the HS2 is a total wate of T/P money....
plus all this carp about woke and LGPT or what ever it is.....
Somebody needs to wake up......

I also have spent more time living abroad than the UK.....better pay and def better weather...
My daughter will also be leaving quite soon.....she says Colchester is not a decent place anymore to start a family.....

G.B.was a great country ruined by corruption and the ignorant pocket filling team/management at the top of everything......

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Tax is just a business cost, but unlike most (all?) other costs it increases if a business or individual is successful. It is fundamentally different to other business costs which are are normally reduced in delivering a profitable and successful enterprise.

Suggesting that increasing tax will stimulate effort and motivate investment is not just counter-intuitive, it is bizarre. If any other cost is increased, effort is directed towards its reduction or avoidance (there's an interesting and appropriate word).

High tax rates encourage the identification of new and innovative ways to avoid it. The Laffer curve is but a theory - but the interesting proposition that there is an optimum level of taxation which maximises tax revenues.

The actual value will vary with different types of taxes, social cohesion etc etc. At the extremes a 0% tax rate generates no tax revenue. A 100% tax rate also generate no tax revenue - why work if it all gets taken away.

Aside from avoidance, the option to simply move to a more welcoming regime is real. In the 1960s and 1970s this was a major loss of trained and skilled resource to the UK. Today, there are reports of trained, skilled and striking NHS staff looking overseas for better pay and conditions.

To assert that individuals are somehow "locked" into the UK is plain implausible. Wealth (property can be sold) can be transferred overseas. Creating legislation to somehow prevent this happening would be a fundamental challenge to the personal freedom which we value so highly.

Companies have little problem in moving - since Brexit many have relocated including Panasonic, Sony, P&O, UBS etc.

 

[deema]

I find it interesting that the perception of the UK is declining and the views decrying it appear to me primarily from individuals with a left wing orientation. Taxation is higher under the conservatives than under the preceding labour government, but standards are perceived to be falling.
The percentage of women employed in government is higher than at any time, in fact they are the majority compared to men. Ethnic minorities are employed by the government at a significantly higher level than that of the overall population, approximately 50% higher. The number of disabled employed by the government is also higher than that of society. These trends are continuing to grow. Arguably indicating that the government is adopting a sexist ableist and racist employment policy which is decreasing the satisfaction of what they are doing. Ironic isn’t it!

https://www.gov.uk/government/stati...stical-bulletin-civil-service-statistics-2022

 

[Jacob]

Tax is just a business cost, but unlike most (all?) other costs it increases if a business or individual is successful. It is fundamentally different to other business costs which are are normally reduced in delivering a profitable and successful enterprise.

Suggesting that increasing tax will stimulate effort and motivate investment is not just counter-intuitive, it is bizarre. If any other cost is increased, effort is directed towards its reduction or avoidance (there's an interesting and appropriate word).

Corporation tax is on business profits. Higher tax encourages businesses to reinvest tax free, rather than to take the profits and pay the tax

High tax rates encourage the identification of new and innovative ways to avoid it. The Laffer curve is but a theory - but the interesting proposition that there is an optimum level of taxation which maximises tax revenues.

The Laffer curve is good for a laugh. The optimum level to maximise tax revenues approaches 100%

The actual value will vary with different types of taxes, social cohesion etc etc. At the extremes a 0% tax rate generates no tax revenue. A 100% tax rate also generate no tax revenue - why work if it all gets taken away.

Because the tax will be over and above various levels of lower or tax free income/profit. It doesn't all get taken away.

Aside from avoidance, the option to simply move to a more welcoming regime is real. In the 1960s and 1970s this was a major loss of trained and skilled resource to the UK. Today, there are reports of trained, skilled and striking NHS staff looking overseas for better pay and conditions.

Not because of tax - it's because of better pay and conditions, as you seem to have noticed. Higher taxes might pay for better pay and conditions.

To assert that individuals are somehow "locked" into the UK is plain implausible. Wealth (property can be sold) can be transferred overseas.

Land, buildings, "real" estate, can't.

...

Companies have little problem in moving - since Brexit many have relocated including Panasonic, Sony, P&O, UBS etc.

Ask yourself what encouraged them to move. To save you time - the answer is Brexit and the destabilising curse of deregulation

 

[mwinfrance]

My monthly income tax payments in the UK were higher than the average UK wage at the time, that was my case from the mid 70's until I left.
Companies can indeed move out of the UK and set up elsewhere ( many have done so ) , but the average UK citizen cannot since Brexit. For them to move to the EU ( or outside of the UK )now requires them to be able to demonstrate a level of financial "cushion" which the vast majority simply do not have the ability to do so , even if they sold their houses to be able to buy in the EU where property is usually cheaper than in the UK. Property in France is usually only 20 to 25% of the equivalent UK price, ( in area to area comparisons ) which was why many Brits moved prior to Brexit. Now they are also required to provide proof that they have financial means to not risk them becoming a burden on the french state. Either as a salary, or as savings. There is also a test of competence in the french language, although it is a much easier version for the over 60's. Setting up as self employed is only possible for incoming Brits if they can show financial reserves ( usually requires to own property here ) and health insurance.The leavers effectively did indeed lock the average Brit into being stuck in the UK.In their position I would be incandescent with anger. especially if I was too young to vote at the time , but now have no way to move out and set up a business elsewhere unless wealthy or have wealthy parents.

 

[deema]

The UK is has the density of people to land area in Europe. Net migration has increased post Brexit. The majority of people arriving in boats are white fleeing a safe but poor socialist country and don’t speak a word of English, Albania.

 

[Fergie 307]

Perhaps we could start a new thread, "constructing things in wood for maximum longevity". We could discuss preferred species, and method of construction, to ensure getting the absolute maximum use out of an object.
I will put Jacob's soapbox forward as a very good initial case study.

 

[John Brown]

Perhaps we could start a new thread, "constructing things in wood for maximum longevity". We could discuss preferred species, and method of construction, to ensure getting the absolute maximum use out of an object.
I will put Jacob's soapbox forward as a very good initial case study.

Why is it only Jacob's stance that's a "soapbox"? Why aren't the right wing xenophobic viewpoints called thus?
Just curious.

 

[Fergie 307]

France is IMO one of the most racist intolerant countries I’ve worked in. How very different people’s perceptions can be.

I wouldn't entirely agree, but have to say I have been made to feel unwelcome on more occasions in France than in any other country I have visited. People often accuse the British of having some kind of superiority complex, some of the French appear to be far worse, in my experience anyway.

 

[Fergie 307]

Why is it only Jacob's stance that's a "soapbox"? Why aren't the right wing xenophobic viewpoints called thus?
Just curious.

I don't think it has anything to do with the view being expressed, rather the desire to ram it down everyone else's throat, and patronize anyone who disagrees. Unpleasant traits whatever your point of view.

 

[Cozzer]

And now, for your further entertainment, a machete fight in broad daylight.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-64903569

 

[John Brown]

France is IMO one of the most racist intolerant countries I’ve worked in. How very different people’s perceptions can be.

I initially read that as intolerant of racists, but now I'm guessing you mean racist and intolerant.
I can't disagree, either way, as I've only ever worked there for a couple of weeks many years ago, although I used to ski there a lot, I don't believe the lift operators are a representative cross section.

 

[John Brown]

I don't think it has anything to do with the view being expressed, rather the desire to ram it down everyone else's throat, and patronize anyone who disagrees. Unpleasant traits whatever your point of view.

Well I'll have to agree to disagree with you. I think there's a lot of that sort of stuff on here, and Jacob, although dogged and uncompromising, is no more unpleasant than some others.

 

[Fergie 307]

You are of course quite right that others do occasionally make remarks that might better have been kept to themselves. However for the sheer volume and regularity of condescending remarks I doubt he would have any serious competition. There is really no need to treat others in a debate as though they are mentally deficient five year olds, as he does with monotonous regularity. A real shame, as he can and does post some interesting and informative stuff, which I have certainly enjoyed and benefitted from. So Jacob, if you are reading this, more of the latter please, and less of the former