Gérard Depardieu - Tax dodger

[MooseBreath]

I do have trouble understanding your English. And I'm in the position in life that you dream of being.

lol

Your tough guy act is brilliant. Like an angry little lady boy.

[Deucalion]

You sound like you're in your early 20s, have possibly done some travelling most likely funded by your parents, and have now got a very loose grip on a few vague liberal ideas and are under the impression that that makes you forward-thinking.

Lefties are not forward thinking because they always recycle the same stale old idealistic bullshit without ever proposing a real well thought out solution. It has been going on for decades.

I can tell you one thing though, you're headed for an absolute beauty of an existential crisis when reality hits.

In my early 20s - I wish !!

Done some travelling paid for by parents - I wish!! My parents were potless and I funded my own travelling.

Forward thinking - This is not how I think of myself. Some things seem right to me and some things seem wrong. It's as simple as that.

No solutions - Violent revolution is the answer! Destroy the status quo !!

Reality - I am actually horribly middle class with a vested interest in the status quo and I am just looking forward to qualifying for Sega Cruises!!

Which proves it is very hard to accurately judge people from what they say on internet forums. But good try !!

[Deucalion]

It's sweet that you think we are dealing with polarised political opinion. The cynic in me says we are actually dealing with self interest

That's because you are right wing and only ever think of yourself. It kind of proves my original point. You also assume I must be in a lower tax bracket because I think the better off should pay more tax.

Right = self interest = nasty

Left = altruism = nice

(snigger)

[The People's Hero]

That's because you are right wing and only ever think of yourself. It kind of proves my original point. You also assume I must be in a lower tax bracket because I think the better off should pay more tax.

Right = self interest = nasty

Left = altruism = nice

(snigger)

Repeat ad infinitum.

Does it seem any truer yet?

[Deucalion]

Repeat ad infinitum.

Does it seem any truer yet?

To me it does seem true or else why would I say it?

I've never met a nice Tory.

The Protestant Work Ethic.

Thanks an awful lot to whoever came up with that one.

It was Moosebreath.

[The People's Hero]

Stalin was a good egg though eh?

[Deucalion]

Stalin was a good egg though eh?

If you say so.

I still prefer him to the likes of Ronald Reagan or George W Bush.

[Finnegan]

Stalin was a good egg though eh?

Stalin wasn't socially liberal, he was an autocratic dictator that enforced fiscally communist ideas to abuse power.

There hasn't really ever been an actual, working, major leftist government in the strictest sense in modern history.

Which is a reasonably good argument that one will never exist. Communism and anarchism are wonderful, utopian ideas in principal but they'll never happen in practice without some enormous, cataclystic collapse in the established system.

Even then I'm not convinced its ever sustainable, we're naturally ambitious creatures.

[The Doctor]

Well, personally I believe in a meritocracy which is to say that I believe that those who are prepared to work hard, to study and to contribute to society, deserve a better lifestyle than those who can't be bothered.

Pah, I like my dream world where Dennis Wise has his entrails ripped out by rabid dogs, and his eyes eaten by crows, only to come back to life two hours later for it to start all over again.

It'd be great if people who worked hard and studied earned back what they put in - but that's just not the case: admittedly an extreme example but take whoever the latest pretty boy lacking the intelligence to work out how to open a jar of jam that won the x-factor (just to clarify, the boy not the jam won the x-factor) against a busker in the street - I've seen buskers with far more talent than x-factor winners, who've put in a great deal of work and studying to become as good at their instrument as they are - they struggle to get by, while the x-factor chap gets paid a ****-ton for little more than turning up to a shit TV show. That's not the hard worker getting the better life, it's quite the opposite.

[danny.]

I don't understand why people moan about footballers/singers/actors on a high wage. They aren't funded by tax - if you don't like it don't watch them play/buy their CD/watch their film.

And if you think there should be more parity of wages, then why not become a footballer/singer/actor yourself?

[Guest]

And if you think there should be more parity of wages, then why not become a footballer/singer/actor yourself?

I guess that would bring more parity to wages.

[Deucalion]

Stalin wasn't socially liberal, he was an autocratic dictator that enforced fiscally communist ideas to abuse power.

There hasn't really ever been an actual, working, major leftist government in the strictest sense in modern history.

Which is a reasonably good argument that one will never exist. Communism and anarchism are wonderful, utopian ideas in principal but they'll never happen in practice without some enormous, cataclystic collapse in the established system.

Even then I'm not convinced its ever sustainable, we're naturally ambitious creatures.

Stalin was a disaster for the huge social experiment of the Soviet Union. One from which it never recovered. Who knows what would've happened had Lenin lived longer or a true socialist replaced him?

I must respectfully disagree that a working example of a Marxist/Socialist state hasn't existed however. Nicaragua had a popular and functioning Marxist state until it was toppled by the CIA. Likewise, who knows what Cuba would be like without the constant threat and economic sanctions from the USA. Why are the USA so frightened of the example these places might provide if allowed to develop without hinderence?

Other examples of Marxist states have existed too, although they haven't been called this. It is common for nomadic peoples to have shared ownership of the means of production. It is only with settled society that a surplus of possessions becomes desirable or even possible.

My point is, it is not impossible for humans to accept common ownership and equality. It is just the way we live and the way we have been conditioned which makes it seem otherwise.

For me, the world would be a hugely better place if it was Marxist. It would need to be applied globally however and it would probably take people a long time to change from being greed and possession driven to being happy with enough and with a decent society.

I doubt this will happen in my lifetime but I would like to think we are capable of it.

ps - an enormous, cataclysmic collapse in the established system seems much more possible at the moment than it has for a long time. Is liberal capitalism crumbling before our eyes?

[Finnegan]

I wouldn't consider Nicaragua or Cuba "major" governments.

[Rincewind]

Maybe we should go back to the times when there were Lords of the Manor and mining pits and every now againg the gentry would throw a loaf of bread into the street for the under-priviliged to scrap over.

[Guest]

Maybe we should go back to the times when there were Lords of the Manor and mining pits and every now againg the gentry would throw a loaf of bread into the street for the under-priviliged to scrap over.

or 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish.

[The People's Hero]

Maybe we should go back to the times when there were Lords of the Manor and mining pits and every now againg the gentry would throw a loaf of bread into the street for the under-priviliged to scrap over.

No one is suggesting that. I'm not sure how you can read an entire thread which does have a number of good points on all sides (and there and not just two sides) and still see this as an attack on the impoverished?

[Carl the Llama]

You are making my point very well thank you.. So once you have earned the €1m, say for royalties from work you did in previous tax years, why would you bother to make any more movies if someone else was taking 75% of the proceeds? Would it be worth the effort when you could clearly live comfortably on the €603,357?

As TPH eloquently put it, there is no sane reason why anyone would stick around and pay that when they could move elsewhere and pay less tax, even if there objective is to choose to spend it on philanthropy.

That's fair enough, and tbh I reckon it's the approach big name actors take anyway regardless of tax percentage, but it's a completely different thing to moving for tax evasion purposes.

[Deucalion]

I wouldn't consider Nicaragua or Cuba "major" governments.

Regardless of their size, they both have or had functioning Marxist governments.

If they are too small for you, what about China or the Soviet Union? I don't think they are good examples of Marxism to be honest. They are better examples of how a communist state can function for a long time and provide an alternative to capitalism. China is an example of how allowing a market in a communist state can be successful. This is something Lenin wanted to do in 1923 but unfortunately died before it was properly implemented.

To save you the trouble, despite their successes, both China and the Soviet Union let themselves down in the following ways:

Human rights

Wealthy and exploitative political classes (grrr)

Aggression to neighbours

Inefficient command economies

But examples do exist of alternative systems.

[danny.]

No one is suggesting that. I'm not sure how you can read an entire thread which does have a number of good points on all sides (and there and not just two sides) and still see this as an attack on the impoverished?

Funny thing is people like GD pay 1000's if not millions more into "the system" than many of the people moaning about their 'dodging', yet somehow they are being exploited by "the rich". No idea where people living purely on benefits think benefit money comes from, but it sure doesn't come from the people that pay nothing into the system and only take.

[Vacamion]

Regardless of their size, they both have or had functioning Marxist governments.

If they are too small for you, what about China or the Soviet Union? I don't think they are good examples of Marxism to be honest. They are better examples of how a communist state can function for a long time and provide an alternative to capitalism. China is an example of how allowing a market in a communist state can be successful. This is something Lenin wanted to do in 1923 but unfortunately died before it was properly implemented.

To save you the trouble, despite their successes, both China and the Soviet Union let themselves down in the following ways:

Human rights

Wealthy and exploitative political classes (grrr)

Aggression to neighbours

Inefficient command economies

But examples do exist of alternative systems.

'Let themselves down?'

They killed tens of millions of people.

So, C minus then?

[Deucalion]

'Let themselves down?'

They killed tens of millions of people.

So, C minus then?

Whereas capitalism has no blood on its hands?

The reason I haven't provided examples is because I don't know where to start.

So blood in the pursuit of profit is ok whereas blood in the name of a better world isn't?

[I am Rod Hull]

Whereas capitalism has no blood on its hands?

The reason I haven't provided examples is because I don't know where to start.

So blood in the pursuit of profit is ok whereas blood in the name of a better world isn't?

You have a strange avatar for someone that seems to be pro-Chinese

[Rincewind]

No one is suggesting that. I'm not sure how you can read an entire thread which does have a number of good points on all sides (and there and not just two sides) and still see this as an attack on the impoverished?

just mucking about

[The People's Hero]

This has gone way off track. I don't think anyone is saying that extreme right or extreme left is the way to go. Extremism and dictatorships are BAD. Ok?

Churchill was right to say - power corrupts - and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[Deucalion]

You have a strange avatar for someone that seems to be pro-Chinese

What do you mean?

<<<<<<< That's what I look like!

...

...

...

...

Good point actually !!