Sarko and purchasing power, 6 months

[jean63]

No luck, elected in the internet age ...... it's hard to tell salads and then find yourself on the internet!

http://video.seniorplanet.fr/video/iLyR ... tor=EPR-20

[Christophe]

hihihih

I have only one thought: "The Little Con has got you well"

[jean63]

hihihih

I have only one thought: "The Little Con has got you well"

Be correct, otherwise you will get yourself in trouble !!

On this one, he cannot say anything because they are REAL videos, it is he who speaks .... and in addition there are many witnesses (female) of the current government (including Nathalie Kosuskio-Morizet under- Minister of the Environment).

[Christophe]

Be correct, otherwise you will get yourself in trouble !!

It was a provisional thought qualified by the "Hiihiihiih"

Who wouldn't think this when seeing this video?

[kira]

No luck, elected in the internet age ...... it's hard to tell salads and then find yourself on the internet!

http://video.seniorplanet.fr/video/iLyR ... tor=EPR-20

pffff! ras no coment looks forward to 5 years from now

[Arthur_64]

I earn a little more than a minimum wage, we are the ones to live with that and I confirm that my purchasing power has not increased.

[stef5555]

I confirm that mine will drop in September !!! because of who??? you all guessed it !!!

go to hell !!!

[Christophe]

In the family of "rising purchasing power" *, I ask the son Hi-Tech... and the mother cars... and the grandfather camping car and the grandmother travel to the other side of the world...

* also called family "We live better and better" ...

[Remundo]

How easily dear friends you discard on Sarko ... If it is a way at the end of the day to let off steam, I forgive you

My point of view ... if I may.

Sarko has always been interested, and even fascinated by power. He is a hyperactive who talks too much because he needs to be at the center of all debates to satisfy his narcissism, but also to channel his hyperactivity.

Certainly he says nonsense, or so a little fiery things that lack nuances. He has his fads, he likes to shine in high society, to show his beautiful rollex, to prick gold-plated pens ... It is shocking and yet it is trifle all that.

But I'll tell you, Sarko doesn't just say nonsense. And on the rather dishonest editing and the biased interpretation that is suggested, I on the contrary agree 100% on what he says;

1. Purchasing power is the central problem in France
2. The coffers are empty and we must have a much broader view to revive the economy. This is what he means by saying "to reduce France to the question of purchasing power is absurd".

And do not bring me out again "the scandalous" tax package for the rich as the current hypochritical leaders of the PS do ...

90% of this money goes directly into the pocket of the working middle classes, or more aptly formulated, the fruit of their labor is not improperly confiscated from them ... and we encourage them to invest in France: building their house, relaunching SMEs, etc. the "rich" too, because the rich, I prefer them in France than in Switzerland or in Liechtenstein. AT least, in France, they place their pépets and create jobs by their investments, direct or indirect.

As far as I am concerned, I have been thinking for a long time that the right and the left are almost powerless to solve the problems. At the same time, there is a government and I let it work, whether it is on the right or on the left. Because bothering him .... systematically and most of the time with bad faith, it is slowing down France of the 4 irons, especially since it is not already going very fast

Purchasing power is a work problem. In France, workers who are not unemployed often work like damned for rotten wages, especially unskilled jobs.

Because they have on their backs all the French debt and the assisted, many of which are incompressible and justified: the retired, the sick, the disabled ...

But I can tell you that in France, millions of young and old perennial brains and muscular arms remain untapped. Besides, it ends up disgusting them rightly. Afterwards, their mentality hardens, and companies in turn distrust. They do not hire ... And then, to pay the social minima induced by these unproductive masses, they collect charges to blow up their cash.

Etr then they close, or they go away ... And even more young and less young idle and disgusted with life, and worse having rage. I can tell you that where I work, I often hear it and it's not a way of speaking ...

And we are in a very good socioeconomic deadlock. I don't know where it will end.
But it is not by sucking Sarko that we will get out. I think we should draw inspiration from the social liberalism developed by England, Germany, Spain, Denmark and Scandinavia.

Besides, contrary to what I read everywhere, Sarko is not a dreadful capitalist addicted to the CAC40 "who throws your c ..": his government is rather a liberal social policy à la Tony Blair.

And in my opinion, despite their great airs of indignant retrogauchos with Soviet accents of 1917, Miss Royale, Hollande and the handsome man Montebourg with the high verb, well, they would do more or less the same ... but perhaps more demos on communication, I grant you

Here it is, @ +

[Arthur_64]

The boxes are certainly empty, but it is time to ask why. By dint of ill-conceived investments, of subsidies not really controlled surely.

Maintaining inactive people is a big expense item, and there are certainly savings to be made there (by counting well, I realize from time to time that I had better be unemployed).

His observation is generally fair, but once again, we see more announcement effects than real progress. Too much communication kills action.

Found on the Internet:

The principle of taxes is simple!

Taxes are explained by an elementary logic, but many still do not understand it. Here is an explanation in terms that everyone can understand.

Suppose that every day 10 men meet at the cafe to drink a beer and that the sum amounts to 100 €, normally each pays 10 €.

If they paid the bill the way you pay taxes, it would look something like this:

* The first 4 (the poorest!) Would pay nothing.
* The fifth would pay € 1,
* The sixth would pay € 3,
* The seventh would pay € 7,
* The eighth would pay € 12,
* The ninth would pay € 18,
* The last (the richest!) Should pay 59 €.

They decided to proceed this way.

The ten men met every day to drink their beer and seemed quite happy with their arrangement, until the day when the tenant placed them before a dilemma:

“Since you are good customers,” he said, “I decided to give you a discount of € 20. You will therefore only pay for your 10 beers € 80."

The group decided to continue paying the new amount as if they were paying their taxes.

The first four would continue to drink for free.
But how were the other six, paying customers, going to divide the € 20 discount evenly?
They calculated that 20 € divided by 6 is 3,33 €, but if they subtract this amount from them, the 5th and 6th men should be paid to drink their beer.

The bar owner suggested that they reduce the addition of each by a declining percentage.
He made calculations and this gave:

* The 5th man, like the first four, paid nothing more (one more poor person!).
* The 6th paid € 2 instead of € 3 (33% reduction)
* The 7th paid € 5 instead of € 7 (28% reduction)
* The 8th paid € 9 instead of € 12 (25% reduction)
* The 9th paid € 14 instead of € 18 (22% reduction)
* The 10th paid € 49 instead of € 59 (16% reduction)

Each of the six "payers" paid less than before and the first 4 continued to drink for free. But once out of the bar, everyone compared their economy:

The 6th said "I only had € 1 out of the € 20 discount", he pointed to the 10th "he got € 10".
Yeah, said the 5th, "I only had € 1 savings too, I wasn't reimbursed."
It is true ! exclaimed the 7th, "why did the 10th get € 10 when I only got € 2, the richest got most of the cut"

Wait a minute, the 1st man shouted, “we the first four got nothing at all, the system is exploiting the poor”.

The 9 men surrounded the 10th and insulted him.

The next day, the 10th man (the richest!) Did not come.

The nine others sat down and drank their beer without him.
But when it came time to pay their bill, they discovered something important: they didn't have enough money to pay even half the bill.

And that, dear paying friends, is a reflection of our tax system.
The people who pay the most taxes get the most benefit from a tax cut.

Tax the strongest, or accuse them of being rich and they may not show up any more.
In fact, they could start going drinking abroad where the atmosphere is, how to say, more friendly ...

For those who understand, no explanation is necessary.
For those who did not understand, no explanation is possible.

What is shocking is not that the rich are rich but that one can earn more unemployment than by working (and again, I get more than the minimum wage). So there is a redistribution somewhere that is badly done.

When we also see that the State is investing in (nuclear) over-generation with ITER, which will not bring much and is uninterested in fusion or purely renewable solutions (or invests much less) we can ask ourselves the relevance of these choices. Choices that directly impact public finances. And this is just one example among many.

Rémundo, when you say that the PS people would do more or less the same thing by being more demagos, I agree.

This is the only difference between the PS and the UMP: dialectics. A demagogic dialectic for the PS, a populist dialectic for the UMP. And that proves one thing: a disregard for the abilities of voters, because the effects are deleterious in both cases.