7 ms·

I don't agree. Once you've experienced the creation of a company, you realize that when a company gives 25€ to an employee, 68€ was was given to the tax and 7€

by tajen 11y ago

I don't agree. Once you've experienced the creation of a company, you realize that when a company gives 25€ to an employee, 68€ was was given to the tax and 7€ to people who help dealing with the tax complexity (accountants, lawyers, inspections). Total 100€, the price the customer pays. And I think those 68€ are too much. So: Tax Heavens: In Argentina you're not allowed to transfer your money abroad, unless approved by the government. I call that a dictatorship. We must not do the same. Tax heavens exist for a reason. We must rather fight tax complexity. Complexity is a weight on every CEO, it's a hidden tax on every worker. No to Tobin tax. Science: Stop exploring the outer space. Let the money for each company/person to hire more employees. When you're old but not disabled yet, don't you want to hire an Au Pair to take care of your laundry? Our people needs money to pay for their local jobs, not for space rockets. Politics: Dismembering NATO and UN is not any kind of solution. We need our own successful startups (I mean the size of Google and Apple) - Why wouldn't we have those in EU? Then we can equally deal at a worldwide level, menace of spying on the world's emails and businesses, or better, we can equally negociate with US a worldwide non-spying treaty. Welfare: The Scandanavian model has become a gimick. My flatmate in Australia was born in Thailand on the countryside and at 22 he was making $1000 a week as a waiter in a hotel. That's what I call: One person, one chance.

igravious 11y ago
No offence. I don't even no where to start in responding to you. In reverse order. Welfare: a single anecdote is no rebuttal, how could it ever be? I've lived in Finland, I've _experienced_ the Scandinavian model first hand and I keep up-to-date on global stats. Granted, they are not perfect places but in terms of inequality (hint: this metric _really_ matters), social inclusion, access and quality of healthcare, education, public services and so on the countries of Scandinavia frequently come out on top _globally_. That is uncontested. Yay for your Thai friend. Maybe they would have made €700 (going rate) a week as a waiter in a hotel in Scandinavia? Politics: I _said_ re-make the UN _security council_. Not dismember the UN! I can't take you seriously if you don't give an honest reading of what I said. But yes, I am advocating disengaging gradually from NATO, it is a source of tension in the world _and_ importantly for Europeans it makes Europe subservient to US foreign policy. The rest of what you say there I cannot understand. Science: Eh hello? All our eggs in one basket? We need to become multi-planetary ASAP. The tech discovered in attempting to do so will actually help improve life on earth. Not a zero-sum game, sorry! Tobin tax: You may not have noticed the recent implosion of the world economy a.k.a. The Great Recession. And the subsequent bailing out of the financial industry. Inequality growing to levels not seen since the Gilded Age. Most people know that the one way to make the financial sector subservient to the rest of the economy and not the other way around is to implement some form of Tobin tax. The UK is quaking in its boots in the EU because it recognises that France, Germany and others want this. Without context your numbers are meaningless. With all respect, you need to realise that anecdotal unreferenced data-points are not a rebuttal to statements of general opinion. For instance you need to assert what you think is wrong with the Scandinavian model, wrong with the idea of a Tobin tax, and so on. Tax havens: You're happy with people scamming the system. I'm not. This process is already well under way by the way.
- tajen 11y ago
  +1 for responding point per point ;) Welfare: At least you've experienced the Scandinavian model, so I'll give credit to your testimonial. I've lived in Australia so I've experienced another one, pretty much at the opposite, and if you say my Thai friend could have made the same money in Oslo, with more healthcare and education, then I'd vote for the Scandavian model. Science: "We need to become multiplanetary asap"? Social inclusion or sustainability is a higher priority to me. Concerning the technological advance that space exploration brings us, well, wherever we pour dozens of billion euros we'll get a technological advance. So I'd rather we explore world hunger than space. But nowadays it's easier to get votes for supporting ESA than world hunger. Tobin tax: If it could solve everything you mention, I would be all for it. But it won't solve inequality and it will slow down our economy again.
  - igravious 11y ago
    Hey, no problem. Kudos for taking the criticism graciously. Welfare: I can't comment on Australia. Australia is resource-rich and people from this part of the world keep emigrating to there and not coming back. I don't know how well Oz treats its poorest, which is my measure of any society. But I'm no commie :) Science: This is what I'm saying. I don't think is totally zero-sum. Granted, money spent on the space programme is money not spent on "world hunger" (where does this go by the way, charity?) But there are economic benefits from pursuing space. I've heard that a lot of world hunger could be solved by reducing subsidies to EU and US farmers which is a form of protectionism which goes against the capitalist spirit, and I'd be all for that to the limit of US and EU being food-independent. So you see, I'm not commie either :) Tobin tax: Clearly there is an economic imbalance to the benefit of the financial sector of the economy. In fact, it seems like many governments get "captured" by finance and so can't effectively regulate and legislate. The Tobin tax is supposed to address this and to the best of my knowledge is said to be a good way of addressing the imbalance by taxing certain types of capital flows. It totally is meant to rebalance the economy thereby making everybody a bit equal which should boost economic growth!
jacquesm 11y ago
No company has to pay 68% employer wage taxes in Europe. I'm saying that as an employer who has looked into this at some point to figure out if there was any major advantage to running a company in one country or another, the bigger differentiator is simply that in some countries wages are simply far lower than in others. Tax havens (not heavens) exist as a form of legal arbitrage and allow those with lots of money to dodge taxes at the expense of those without and as such are a real problem. Nike and Google combined paid less tax in NL last year than I did, which is quite wrong given their massive turnover and profits. http://qz.com/240511/heres-how-much-tax-google-paid-on-its-european-operations-last-year/ http://qz.com/240511/heres-how-much-tax-google-paid-on-its-e... Not exploring outer space is the equivalent of shutting down one of the more productive avenues of basic research, if you took away all of the spin-offs of space research from your house it would dramatically change your quality of life. Your NATO/UN start-up link makes no sense, the EU governments are very much complicit in the spying scandal. The Scandinavian model can only be compared to other models if you wish to criticize it meaningfully, your anecdote is meaningless, a better alternative will certainly be given more consideration.
- igravious 11y ago
  You said it better than I could. I would add that the EU is not standing still at all. It is making moves on a number of these fronts. Havens: The Irish/Dutch loophole is being closed. Switzerland and Lichtenstein and others are coming under ever increasing scrutiny[1]. But you probably already know this. Space: ESA[2], Galileo[3]. Note that Galileo is a ESA project, which would be like NASA building/funding GPS. Civilian rather than military. [1] http://www.cnbc.com/id/100783858 http://www.cnbc.com/id/100783858 "Europe's Vanishing Tax Havens" [2] http://www.esa.int/About_Us/Welcome_to_ESA/ESA_history/Forty_years_of_the_ESA_Convention http://www.esa.int/About_Us/Welcome_to_ESA/ESA_history/Forty... [3] http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Navigation/The_future_-_Galileo/Why_Europe_needs_Galileo http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Navigation/The_future_-_Ga...
- tajen 11y ago
  VAT 20%, Social contributions 46%, income tax 10-15%, residence tax 5%. Mandatory accountant (2000€/year), corporate yearly registration fees, corporate local tax. Assuming no expense at the company level, the employees can buy 25€ of new products. Total burden: 75€ out of 100€ sales (since some tax are compounded and others have an excess/floor system). Did I make my point? I know you'll keep arguing, but please reckon first that the 75% burden is a fact.
istvan__ 11y ago
How about taxing corporation based on their income rather than on the profit? Just like you and me are taxed.

by tajen 11y ago

igravious 11y ago

No offence. I don't even no where to start in responding to you. In reverse order. Welfare: a single anecdote is no rebuttal, how could it ever be? I've lived in Finland, I've _experienced_ the Scandinavian model first hand and I keep up-to-date on global stats. Granted, they are not perfect places but in terms of inequality (hint: this metric _really_ matters), social inclusion, access and quality of healthcare, education, public services and so on the countries of Scandinavia frequently come out on top _globally_. That is uncontested. Yay for your Thai friend. Maybe they would have made €700 (going rate) a week as a waiter in a hotel in Scandinavia? Politics: I _said_ re-make the UN _security council_. Not dismember the UN! I can't take you seriously if you don't give an honest reading of what I said. But yes, I am advocating disengaging gradually from NATO, it is a source of tension in the world _and_ importantly for Europeans it makes Europe subservient to US foreign policy. The rest of what you say there I cannot understand. Science: Eh hello? All our eggs in one basket? We need to become multi-planetary ASAP. The tech discovered in attempting to do so will actually help improve life on earth. Not a zero-sum game, sorry! Tobin tax: You may not have noticed the recent implosion of the world economy a.k.a. The Great Recession. And the subsequent bailing out of the financial industry. Inequality growing to levels not seen since the Gilded Age. Most people know that the one way to make the financial sector subservient to the rest of the economy and not the other way around is to implement some form of Tobin tax. The UK is quaking in its boots in the EU because it recognises that France, Germany and others want this. Without context your numbers are meaningless. With all respect, you need to realise that anecdotal unreferenced data-points are not a rebuttal to statements of general opinion. For instance you need to assert what you think is wrong with the Scandinavian model, wrong with the idea of a Tobin tax, and so on. Tax havens: You're happy with people scamming the system. I'm not. This process is already well under way by the way.

tajen 11y ago
+1 for responding point per point ;) Welfare: At least you've experienced the Scandinavian model, so I'll give credit to your testimonial. I've lived in Australia so I've experienced another one, pretty much at the opposite, and if you say my Thai friend could have made the same money in Oslo, with more healthcare and education, then I'd vote for the Scandavian model. Science: "We need to become multiplanetary asap"? Social inclusion or sustainability is a higher priority to me. Concerning the technological advance that space exploration brings us, well, wherever we pour dozens of billion euros we'll get a technological advance. So I'd rather we explore world hunger than space. But nowadays it's easier to get votes for supporting ESA than world hunger. Tobin tax: If it could solve everything you mention, I would be all for it. But it won't solve inequality and it will slow down our economy again.
- igravious 11y ago
  Hey, no problem. Kudos for taking the criticism graciously. Welfare: I can't comment on Australia. Australia is resource-rich and people from this part of the world keep emigrating to there and not coming back. I don't know how well Oz treats its poorest, which is my measure of any society. But I'm no commie :) Science: This is what I'm saying. I don't think is totally zero-sum. Granted, money spent on the space programme is money not spent on "world hunger" (where does this go by the way, charity?) But there are economic benefits from pursuing space. I've heard that a lot of world hunger could be solved by reducing subsidies to EU and US farmers which is a form of protectionism which goes against the capitalist spirit, and I'd be all for that to the limit of US and EU being food-independent. So you see, I'm not commie either :) Tobin tax: Clearly there is an economic imbalance to the benefit of the financial sector of the economy. In fact, it seems like many governments get "captured" by finance and so can't effectively regulate and legislate. The Tobin tax is supposed to address this and to the best of my knowledge is said to be a good way of addressing the imbalance by taxing certain types of capital flows. It totally is meant to rebalance the economy thereby making everybody a bit equal which should boost economic growth!

jacquesm 11y ago

No company has to pay 68% employer wage taxes in Europe. I'm saying that as an employer who has looked into this at some point to figure out if there was any major advantage to running a company in one country or another, the bigger differentiator is simply that in some countries wages are simply far lower than in others. Tax havens (not heavens) exist as a form of legal arbitrage and allow those with lots of money to dodge taxes at the expense of those without and as such are a real problem. Nike and Google combined paid less tax in NL last year than I did, which is quite wrong given their massive turnover and profits. http://qz.com/240511/heres-how-much-tax-google-paid-on-its-european-operations-last-year/ http://qz.com/240511/heres-how-much-tax-google-paid-on-its-e... Not exploring outer space is the equivalent of shutting down one of the more productive avenues of basic research, if you took away all of the spin-offs of space research from your house it would dramatically change your quality of life. Your NATO/UN start-up link makes no sense, the EU governments are very much complicit in the spying scandal. The Scandinavian model can only be compared to other models if you wish to criticize it meaningfully, your anecdote is meaningless, a better alternative will certainly be given more consideration.

igravious 11y ago
You said it better than I could. I would add that the EU is not standing still at all. It is making moves on a number of these fronts. Havens: The Irish/Dutch loophole is being closed. Switzerland and Lichtenstein and others are coming under ever increasing scrutiny[1]. But you probably already know this. Space: ESA[2], Galileo[3]. Note that Galileo is a ESA project, which would be like NASA building/funding GPS. Civilian rather than military. [1] http://www.cnbc.com/id/100783858 http://www.cnbc.com/id/100783858 "Europe's Vanishing Tax Havens" [2] http://www.esa.int/About_Us/Welcome_to_ESA/ESA_history/Forty_years_of_the_ESA_Convention http://www.esa.int/About_Us/Welcome_to_ESA/ESA_history/Forty... [3] http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Navigation/The_future_-_Galileo/Why_Europe_needs_Galileo http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Navigation/The_future_-_Ga...
tajen 11y ago
VAT 20%, Social contributions 46%, income tax 10-15%, residence tax 5%. Mandatory accountant (2000€/year), corporate yearly registration fees, corporate local tax. Assuming no expense at the company level, the employees can buy 25€ of new products. Total burden: 75€ out of 100€ sales (since some tax are compounded and others have an excess/floor system). Did I make my point? I know you'll keep arguing, but please reckon first that the 75% burden is a fact.

istvan__ 11y ago

How about taxing corporation based on their income rather than on the profit? Just like you and me are taxed.