• RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Les critères pour définir un « ultra-riche » devraient varier d’un pays de l’UE à un autre en raison des différences économiques, fiscales et sociales entre les Etats membres. A titre d’exemple, en Belgique, nous proposons que toute personne qui dispose de 1,25 million d’euros en plus de son habitation principale et des avoirs affectés à son activité professionnelle soit qualifiée d’ « ultra-riche ».

    If disposable assets (in addition to your house and normal expenses) of €1.25M counts as ultra-rich in Belgium what is rich then? And well-off? Isn’t the whole “eat the rich” idea targeted at billionaires which is a whole other level than this definition?

    • Maalus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The “idea” stems from envy. It sounds good when it targets billionaires, but it will end up taxing anyone slightly well-off.

      • SSJMarx@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        1.25M - not including your house and your professional assets - is quite a bit more than “slightly” well off. Any point you place the new tax at is going to be equally as arbitrary as any other point.

  • Cam@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Tax the rich, and the rich will leave. When the rich leave, good luck getting a job since there are less places to work. Got no job? Enjoy being poor! Wanna start a business? You can but your better off working a 9 to 5!

    If I was rich, I would avoid countries with high taxes and countries that target the rich since why the fuck would you as a rich guy live in a country that robs you with joy?