Bjornir

They can do what they already do and use their unrealized gains as collateral for a loan and use that to pay the tax of they don't want to realize the gains. This is already how they spend their money without realizing gains. I don't see the issue with them doing the same for taxes as they do for their yachts and private jets.

The class war was started 40 years ago, so no because we are already in it. The issue is only one side is aware of it.

There are probably a hundred time more Java developers than rust developers. I think that is the whole point of choosing Java.

Medical use is absolutely revolutionary. From GP's consultations to reading tests results, radios, AI is already better than humans and will be getting better and better.

Computers are exceptionally good at storing large amount of data, and with ML they are great at taking a lot of input and inferring a result from that. This is essentially diagnosing in a nutshell.

If what you said was true there wouldn't be any companies outside of like the caymans islands. Taxation is not the only thing a company look at when choosing where to go. Sure obviously you can't tax at 100%, but we are currently way lower than we used a few decades ago, so we totally can raise it (actually just go back to what it was even just 10 years ago).

As for the retirement age of 60, you say it is impossible yet it was the retirement age in France until like 15 years ago. Since then we dramatically reduced the taxation on companies and capital gains, and slightly increased the age of retirement. That is to say it is absolutely possible and does not demand big systemic changes, only some adjustments on a few variables.

Also the retirement age until 6 months ago was 62, and projections for the next decades showed the system would be making benefits for a few years, then deficit, then back to benefits later in the century, while keeping everything (tax level, retirement age) the same. The choice was to reduce taxes on companies and capital gains, and raise retirement age, which would end up costing more in like 30 years from now than if we kept the same age (not even talking about not reducing taxation on that point)

We are, as a society, extremely rich. It is just not well distributed thus people think we don't have money for this or that.

Taxing more means more revenue for the system, thus reaching equilibrium. It's recurring income so it doesn't move the problem into the futur.

What the government did however, that is moving the issue down the line, as it does reduce cost now, but in the future it will cost more than if they didn't do anything. As usual, absolutely no foresight whatsoever, lies upon pile of lies.

We produce more than enough for everyone to be above poverty, to retire at 60, to have free Healthcare. However choices were made so instead of that we have a few super billionaires, people living in the street, etc etc

The idea would simply be to stop giving so many taxes cuts to companies.

In tenace we recently raised the retirement age because according to the government there was not enough money, the usual bullshit.

Why bullshit you ask? Because it is the very same government that removed three times as much as what they said was missing from pension funds in taxes on companies. They also reduced taxes on capital gains, to bring it to a lower level as what someone middle class would pay on their salary, part of which goes to finance pensions.

We have the money, we always have, it is just a matter of choosing where to put it. Most government of the West decided to put it in the hands of the few richest.

And he owes around 5k€ in back rent! That is proper justice for once.

Ozone is also used to disinfect, that's double the disinfection power!!!

Why do airlines still buy Boeing? New airplanes they make are clearly dangerous, and they don't seem to be able to fix it for the next one, as we are already at the next ones...

She didn't resign, the president removed her. She wanted to stay, but the president wouldn't let her because then she would beat the previous record of 49.3 by a single prime minister.