Kurt, Cyrus and Joseph, take note: Hollande was elected to tax the rich
Malta’s socialist politicians are celebrating because Francois Hollande has beaten Sarkozy to become the new president of France.
For the last few years they have carefully avoided all mention of the words ‘socialist’ and ‘socialism’ in print and speech, banning them along with the use of red and the old arma tal-partit.
They sit with the socialist group in the European Parliament, but keep the name corralled in Brussels and Strasbourg and never bring it home to Valletta or Mile End, Hamrun.
Now suddenly they’ve remembered they’re socialists – or sort-of socialists, the sort of socialists who left fundamentally liberal-left policies up to the Nationalist Party, like the rolling out of vastly improved free healthcare and education up to tertiary level, free training programmes and worker-reintegration schemes, European Union membership and the shift to a service-based economy.
Kurt Farrugia, Cyrus Engerer and the rest of the shoddy lot are celebrating on Facebook, making Francois Hollande’s victory that of Joseph Muscat’s party, as expected.
They’ve never been very bright and tonight they proved it beyond measure. Francois Hollande was elected mainly on the strength of his promise to tax the rich more and harder while easing austerity measures.
This is precisely what a key part of the Maltese electorate fears that Joseph Muscat plans to do. They think that this is the reason he has kept his plans under wraps.
By drawing a parallel between Hollande and Muscat, Labour’s communications coconut and his fellow-travellers consolidate these fears.
The people whose votes they’re after do not want a Francois Hollande for Malta. Malta is not France. The definition of rich is, in France, a few noughts higher than it is in Malta.
In France, the rich truly are different to the rest. They live different lives.
This is not to say that they should be taxed punitively. I disagree that people should be punished or penalised or discriminated against for having more money. But ordinary people in France feel detached from the fate of the rich and so think nothing of voting for higher taxes, because those taxes will not affect them directly.
They will affect them indirectly eventually, when money begins leaving the country and businesses take their investment elsewhere. But that’s another story.
In Malta, things are more than a little different. The place is tiny, the population is small, and everybody is tangled up with everybody else. Thanks to two decades of essentially liberal-left Nationalist government policies, people here no longer think of those with money as the enemy. They no longer think of them as different. Malta’s rich people are now largely working-class heroes who splash it about, like Labour Business Forum’s Sandro Chetcuti.
The Labour Party itself has at least two millionaires in parliament, Marlene Farrugia (formerly Pullicino Orlando) and Anthony Zammit. And that’s just going on the basis of official declarations of assets. There are almost certainly another two, Karmenu Vella and Charles Mangion.
You’d think that would be our guarantee against Labour plans to tax the rich. But it isn’t. Income tax was punitive during the Golden Years of Socialism 1971 to 1987 and that was when the richest people in Malta were Labour cabinet ministers and their hangers-on.
Except for a tranche of socio-economic group DE, who vote Labour anyway, nobody here in Malta is rooting for higher taxes on the rich to allow the government to put down the price of water and electricity. The reason is that the definition of rich in Malta is several noughts shorter than it is in France, and this means if we are not hit ourselves then members of our families might well be, and we know it.
We also know, because we had direct experience of it under our own socialist government up to the 1980s, when the top tax rate was around 90%, that when those who earn more are taxed to hell, they will send the taxman to hell by taking their money out of the country, or they will lose their incentive to earn because there’s no point.
So, Kurt Farrugia, before you continue to celebrate the rise of socialism in France as a prelude to the rise of socialism in Malta, do stop and try to think.
And do note that Francois Hollande is proud to be red and uses the colour and the red socialist flag.
Besides, it is obvious to all but the truly brainwashed that in terms of personal/political style and attitude, Muscat has a whole lot more in common with Sarkozy than he does with Hollande. I imagine that privately, Muscat admires, identifies with and envies Sarkozy and not Hollande.
From an Agence France Presse report earlier tonight:
The first faux pas came on the very evening of his election, when he feted his victory in fine style in the glitzy Paris eatery Fouquet’s with some of France’s richest people, setting the seal on an image of tasteless excess.
(…)
Sarkozy tried to rise to the occasion as a global statesman, staging crisis summit after crisis summit, but his high-rolling Rolex and Ray-Ban image sat ill with an age of austerity, and French voters turned their backs on him.
“The most important factor is the way in which he vulgarised politics and lowered the status of the presidential office for his own ends,” said political scientist Stephane Rozes of the Cap Institute.
22 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
An important reason why the French changed their President was the stance taken by Sarkozy on immigrants. His position was too much to the right.
Now, if I am not mistaken, Joseph Muscat’s position on the same subject here in Malta got the approval of Norman Lowell, so there you go.
I watched the French election victory celebrations on France24 yesterday. Many veiled Muslim women and Africans joined the demonstrations in Paris, they were overjoyed with the result.
France will soon be flooded with poor illegal immigrants.
“Besides, it is obvious to all but the truly brainwashed that in terms of personal/political style and attitude, Muscat has a whole lot more in common with Sarkozy than he does with Hollande. Privately, I imagine that Muscat admires, identifies with and envies Sarkozy and not Hollande.”
Remember this one?
http://daphnecaruanagalizia.com/2012/01/joseph-sarkozy-too-bad-he-aint-got-the-broad/
I would bet my bottom dollar that within weeks of Joseph Muscat being elected PM the VAT rate will be increased to 20-21%.
It is the only way he can pay for all the promises he is making. Yet none of our journalists have had the temerity to ask Joseph Muscat if and what taxes will be increased when he is elected.
Increasing the VAT rate would sit well with the Socialist policy of he who spends more is taxed more.
Apart from socialist aggression there are two things in common between Hollande and Muscat, both have no experience in political office and both love burgers.
The Maltese bolsheviks forget a rather critical chapter in French history: the French Revolution which according to many sociologists is one of the reasons why most French, today, remain socialist at heart, and extremely sensitive to cries of taxing the rich to alleviate the burdens of the poor.
The spirit of the Revolution still lives today and the French are extremely proud of it.
The blue-coloured-reds believe that the same applies to Malta: not necessarily so. I believe that both parties underemphasise the glaring socio-cultural contradictions of the Maltese.
Hollande must be so happy now
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20120507/local/muscat-congratulates-hollande.418670
What a load of hogwash.
[Daphne – It’s actually pretty accurate, Stingray. Don’t forget that I speak from the perspective of somebody whose vote Labour wants (but won’t get), while you speak from the perspective of the brainwashed from birth (or bitter thereafter). The one thing you can’t accuse me of is being brainwashed from birth in support of the PN. It really gets you, doesn’t it, that I made a rational choice.]
Hi 5 for the reply.
Actually I think that this post is the most accurate description of Maltese politics that I’ve ever read.
I don’t know whether it’s due to our “islander mentality” but the Maltese will always have a natural tendency to lean towards a right-wing conservative mindset and our parliament shows it clearly.
As usual Socialists promising the earth – as when they had reduced the working week from 40 hours to 35 hours, and it took Chirac massive strikes to revert to 40 hours.
Now Hollande has even promised to REDUCE the retirement age, while every country si pushing hard to increase it.
Bla misthija, just to win votes.
One of Hollande’s promises is that of taxing income above a million euros at 75%. London’s estate agents have geared their sales offices including reserved seats for rich Parisians on the Eurostar.
Bugatti’s considering transferring it’s highly qualified personnel to the North Action branch to maintain the personal relations built over the past years and keep the quality of service.
“Except for a tranche of socio-economic group DE, who vote Labour anyway, nobody here in Malta is rooting for higher taxes on the rich…”
Really?
[Daphne – Yes, Albert, really. Trust me. The rich in Malta are really just the middle class. Perhaps that’s what Joseph means when he says he’s going to create a new middle-class: he’s going to eradicate the present one through taxation.]
In France, the unemployment today is around 10%, and their bond rating is quite high. Let’s see where it will be in a year.
The French people love an easy life; they would have voted for anyone who promised them fewer working hours and early retirement age without consequences.
Another Sabatero here.
I totally don’t understand the reasoning behind the idea of taxing the rich at a higher rate, which no doubt is the trick Muscat is keeping up his sleeve.
Hopefully people will wake up before its too late. Besides, why would anyone in their right senses want to tax those who use inititiative and creativity, and who are taking the necessary risks and providing jobs for others?
Why would anyone penalize (with higher taxes) those who are creating wealth for the country?
Shouldn’t incentives apply so that we can all be encouraged to work harder, create more jobs and in the process more taxes will be collected?
How about a flat rate for all income brackets? Again I ask: Why a penalty for those who choose to work hard and take risks?
When I hear how so many PL supporters can’t wait to have the PL in government because they will get gas and electricity for practically nothing, when I see PL supporters rubbing their hands with glee when we all ask “where will you get the money to pay the difference on gas and electricity?”, when I read comments about how they all wish Muscat to be worse than Mintoff to PN supporters, I can’t help but think that they want all those who they think make more money to pay for it all.
And I am seriously worried that it won’t be a case of taxing the rich to give to the slightly less rich. It will be taxing the PN supporters to give to the PL supporters.
I am under the impression that the cost of fuel, gas, and cost of living will not exist any more, because there is a socialist president. It might be that even the global economic recession will disappear now.
U halluna! Issa naraw jekk il-petrol, il-gass u hafna affarijiet ohra jorhsux fi Franza ghax hemm president socjalista. Issa l-prova.
Stingray, you got it all wrong about Daphne.
I can vouch that her family were definitely not PN voters in the past and did like thousands of others who changed to voting PN because Mintoff and the two others that came after him were disastrous. This Muscat is even worse than the three put together.
This is exactly Daphne’s forte.
She comes from a very well-known, non-PN Maltese family with a surfeit of grey matter.
This background gives her the necessary clout to attack the PL and its leadership and expose their myriad foibles.
She is further blessed with the ability of putting pen to paper in a most inimitable fashion.
[Daphne – I’m going to have to specify that ‘non-PN’ here means Stricklandjani. I don’t want anyone to think that we voted Labour, or worse, for Mintoff.]
The majority voted for Hollande because of the economic crisis and also because of Sarkozy’s manners. Hollande stated he wants to be a “normal” president.
Daphne, there’s a great piece on Francois Hollande in The Economist. Maybe Cyrus and co, ought to give it a look before hitching themselves to his wagon http://www.economist.com/node/21553446
I know I’m stating the obvious, but what on earth can Cyrus Engerer’s explanation be for celebrating a socialist victory?
The so-called explanation he gave for suddenly switching to Labour was Prime Minister Gonzi’s vote in parliament on the divorce bill.
Did this change his political views completely and turn him into a socialist?
Why don’t journalists ask these questions?
When the Sliema local council was dissolved, Cyrus declared that this was done so that the Nationalist Party could grant the ‘usual favours’.
So I ask you, Cyrus Engerer, when you knowingly contested the election on behalf of the Nationalist Party, before stabbing the people who elected you in the back, did you do this with the intention of carrying out the ‘usual favours’?