How very Murphyite the French are

\”Those who are seeking exile abroad are not those who are scared of becoming poor,\” the prime minister declared after unveiling sweeping anti-poverty measures to help those hit by the economic crisis.

These individuals are leaving \”because they want to get even richer,\” he said. \”We cannot fight poverty if those with the most, and sometimes with a lot, do not show solidarity and a bit of generosity,\” he added.

\”Thankfully, few are seeking exile to exempt themselves from being in solidarity with fellow Frenchmen.\”

Because, well, once we\’ve got over the outright denial that anyone ever moves for tax purposes, we then get the insistence that even if you can and do you shouldn\’t. You should just sit still to be fleeced instead.

Socialist MP Yann Galut called for the actor to be \”stripped of his nationality\” if he failed to pay his dues in his mother country, saying the law should be changed to enable such a punishment.

Because it\’s not actually your money. It\’s the State\’s, you\’re just allowed to handle it for a little bit before handing it over.

Very Murphyite, eh?

14 comments on “How very Murphyite the French are

  1. Indeed, your argument that Ritchie is wrong that people don’t move for tax is moot, since he wants to tax you on your passport anyway.

    Remember that your passport is “the property of Her Majesty’s Government and can be withdrawn at any time”.

  2. Instead of stripping someone of their citizenship if they leave the country. And what about all the people who leave their country not because of tax reasons but because they want to live and work elsewhere for all manner of other reasons.

    Anyway, why not just adopt the US protocol where one is taxed at USA rates on one’s global income (making allowance for double tax treaties).

  3. The serfs are fleeing. The French state wants them dragged back to the Plantation.

    The French really skipped from the feudal bit to the totalitarian bit without much interest in the liberal bit in the middle didn’t they?

    I look forward to a new Berlin Wall running along the border with Belgium.

  4. “I look forward to a new Berlin Wall running along the border with Belgium.”
    Bugger off. We can walk to the bar in Le Bizet & have a cigarette with the beer, like all the other French. Even the police. Belgium’s a sensible country

  5. Interesting to contrast Depardieu’s actions with Alec Baldwin’s overblown and empty threats to leave the US if Bush was re-elected.

    Money clearly talks louder than partisan politics.. :)

  6. “Bugger off. We can walk to the bar in Le Bizet & have a cigarette with the beer, like all the other French. Even the police. Belgium’s a sensible country”

    That’s an effing long walk from Spain, you’d need a couple of beers and a smoke before walking back.

  7. I wonder whether a political culture that deprecates the pursuit of wealth correlates in any way with a wider culture in which relative poverty is increasing. Put another way, if more of the French were willing and able to do as has Depardieu, then the problem as complained of by the French government will diminish.

  8. @Shinsei #2

    Because citizenship-based taxation is a total fustercluck: for instance, a Swede on a really good salary in Switzerland would be living and eating like a pauper.

    And how do you deal with dual-nationals living in a 3rd country? Who gets the second bite of the apple?

    There’s a reason why in the last decades everyone except the US and Eritrea have ditched it, and the Eritrean system is ultra-simple and only 2%.

  9. bloke in spain – “Bugger off. We can walk to the bar in Le Bizet & have a cigarette with the beer, like all the other French. Even the police. Belgium’s a sensible country”

    I think that perhaps a little of the nuance of my comment may have passed over my head. And walk to the bar? Don’t tell me you and the bloke in France are actually the same person?

    Dennis The Peasant – “Given a choice, why would anyone want French citizenship in the first place?”

    Because you can rape all the twelve year old Californians you like? Because it beats the sh!t out of being Moroccan?

  10. Because you can rape all the twelve year old Californians you like? Because it beats the sh!t out of being Moroccan?

    Please lets get our facts straight about Roman Polanski, the grand jury charges were rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14, and furnishing a controlled substance to a minor.

    Statutory rape was just the charge he admitted.

  11. John Galt – “Please lets get our facts straight about Roman Polanski, the grand jury charges were rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14, and furnishing a controlled substance to a minor. Statutory rape was just the charge he admitted.”

    I don’t see how, even with the most generous will, this could be interpreted as correcting anything I said. Especially as I did not even mention Polanski.

    But the problems go a little wider than that. In 1977 a group of French people signed a petition complaining about the arrest of three Frenchmen who had been jail for having sex with 12 and 13 year old girls. They called for all age of consent laws to be abolished. In 1979 a similar letter was produced for a Frenchman who was charged with living with a series of girls aged from six to 12.

    Among those signing were, naturally, the usual suspects – Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, Louis Althusser, Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir, André Glucksmann, and Roland Barthes for instance. And, to my surprise, Bernard Kouchner.

    So it isn’t just Polanski.

    A translation of the letter is here: http://www.ipce.info/ipceweb/Library/00aug29b1_from_1977.htm

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>