Hacker News Reader

Comment by juancn | Hacker News Reader

France is desperate.

They have a deficit problem, they cannot print money and people really don't want to give up their pensions.

Unless the curb public spending they are heading to a hard crash (and will probably take a couple other economies for the ride).

View on HN

Couldn't they just admit the problem with capitalism is that you run out of other people's money, and then stop giving all the tax money to billionaires, and then there'd be enough money left for everyone else?

The french government is who decided the french government has to pay all that money, they can just decide differently.

Quite terrifying that this appears to be a sincere comment. The top marginal tax rate on French nationals including CEHR is over 55%. The country spends ~60% of its GDP, almost 10% higher than the European average, let alone the average worldwide.

Could you elaborate how France is "giving all the money to billionaires"?

That's quite easy: billionaires are not contributing fairly and constantly evade taxation, thus concentrating more and more of the national added value.

You could kill them all and take every penny they own and it still wouldn't solve the problem.

That presumes billionaires have no agency and aren't at all responsible for the world we live in. It assumes they don't spend millions on political ads and lobbyists and politicians. That they aren't responsible for the actions their companies take. That private equity does the things they do and the billionaires funding them don't have any say in what they do. It assumes billionaires' companies aren't also responsible for how the world is going, and that they don't meeting with other billionaires and make plans together.

None of that matters for the French national spending and budget issue.

They arent the ones driving up pensions for the retired, or instituting the anti-growth policies.

Like I said, kill every single one and the problem would still be there.

So once you've milked the 43 French billionaires to extend French spending by 2.5 years or so (this assumes you extract 100% of their wealth into actual liquidity), what's your plan for year 3?

Quite terrifying that this appears to be a sincere comment. Do you really believe billionaires pay even near the top marginal rate? It’s well established that once you reach the very very top of fortunes, the effective tax rate starts going down.

https://www.ipp.eu/publication/note-ipp-n92-quels-impots-les...

It's astounding how bad faith you people are.

The question wasn't "does every billionaire pay the top marginal tax rate", it was: could you elaborate how France is "giving all the money to billionaires"? which was the OP's claim.

If this was true, it'd be simple for your ilk to answer it directly. Since it's not, you lie, misdirect, and shift the goalposts around in defense of the original lie, viciously attacking straw men that you erected.

France gives no money to billionaires. Even if you think their tax rate should be higher, those billionaires pay billions into a system that's managed to bankrupt itself through massive spending on general entitlements. You could take every billionaire in France to the guillotine, steal 100% of their wealth, and it'd fund the French government for less than two years. Spending must go down.

What do you mean "you people"? "Your ilk"?

Can you be a bit more polite? i.e. I am polite despite the fact you're often carrying water for the "top 0.1%" in your comments, for an unknown reason.

Still no answer here to the question — just more bad faith, more misdirection, more libel.

What libel did you see from me? Or misdirection? I'm not the GP from the original thread, I was just pointing out your repeated behaviour.

> Couldn't they just admit the problem with capitalism is that you run out of other people's money

What do you mean when you say "capitalism"?

If you're suggesting what I think you're suggesting (just stealing the public debt) the problem with that is

1) paying money to billionnaires cost 67B euros, let's say 10% more this year, to 73B (interest on debt so France can keep lending 170B more every year)

2) not paying money to billionnaires costs 170B euros (france needs 170B euros in new debt every year to balance the books)

Oh and of course when it does become worth doing, stealing the public debt, there is still the little matter of needing to get French people to do 250B worth of extra labor without paying them 1 cent extra (if they kick the can down the road, which they will, it should settle on about that amount per year). Essentially French people will have to work 1/6th harder one way or the other. But by paying billionnaires they can wait with that another 4 years.

Or, you know, they could work 1/30th extra now. 11 days per year. But that means not kicking the can down the road.

Similar figures for all EU countries (except Germany, for the moment at least), but they get to watch France solve it first because they're not the worst offender.

The proble. Is they dont do that. It is mostly going to retired pensioners. Now you have a conflict between the voting elderly masses and the workers paying taxes.

The billionaires are irrelevant. You could take every penny they have and it wouldn't make a difference

Just lower the rent then.

The actual problem to admit is that the crony capitalist state that's regulated out the nose always leads to failure when you keep trying to control markets through a government force. The only rational thing to do is admit that the government is doing more harm than good and deregulate to the bare minimum if at all and have a 5 year plan to fire every single government employee and let the population actually decide how their country is run.

They won't do that because all the government employees love their government jobs and they also can't admit that importing millions of foreigners that hate French culture isn't working.

As the Europeans were forced to cut off cheap energy supply from Russia, it has really hurt some of their economies and it has partly contributed to the economic crisis emerging in EU. It is one of the major reasons why EU members are so opposed to ending the Ukraine war, despite their ally US pointing out that that horse (i.e. the proxy war) has been whipped for all its political worth and prolonging it anymore will likely backfire on the west (a defeat of Ukraine strengthens Russia, a defeat of Russia may result in nuclear war or further break up of it resulting in unrest and possibly civil war in that region that China would exploit and benefit hugely from as it moves to capture Russian territories, to protect its own interest, while any new breakaway nation states that form may also possess nuclear weapons from the vast Russian nuclear arsenal presenting other long term headaches). A "mini wartime" economy due to the Ukraine war is the only thing, some EU members feel, is sustaining their economy, away from the breakpoint. And specifically, with respect to France, one of the major issue it has is that it never really gave up its imperialistic stake in its African colonies, which has been increasingly challenged by competition from China and Russia. As Africans increasingly assert their sovereignty, France is slowly being edged out in Africa. Even the Americans are now encroaching in Africa, on French influence, to retain western influence there and protect West's access to African natural resources.

I don't think anyone is opposed to ending Russia's war of conquest in Ukraine, what Europeans tend to be opposed to is allowing conquest to stand, no?

Which EU members feel that regarding a ""mini wartime" economy"? Where can I see that evidenced?

- what Europeans tend to be opposed to is allowing conquest to stand, no?

Maybe. I am sceptical as I don't see that in their political actions. What realistic and practical solution do they actually offer towards that end, except for saying war will not end until they accept our demand (a stand quite similar to Russia)? (That strategy would be appropriate if, with their support, Ukraine could actually reclaim its lost territories - i.e. a military solution was viable. But it is clear that without NATO troops in the battlefield, this is highly unlikely.).

As for the claim of "mini wartime" economy, everyone was worried about the state of EU's economy when the war started and as it progressed, demands for declaring a wartime economy became very public. Some examples:

2022: Ukraine economic shock - https://www.eib.org/en/stories/ukraine-trade-inflation

2022: OECD report on impact of Russian war - https://www.oecd.org/newsroom/russia-s-war-of-aggression-aga...

2023: Does Europe need to declare a 'wartime economy'? - https://www.dw.com/en/does-europe-need-to-declare-a-wartime-...

2025: 'War economy:' Is the European 'peace project' at risk? - https://www.dw.com/en/what-is-a-war-economy/a-71996625

2025: Europe Rearms: What Defense Spending Means for Markets - https://rpc.cfainstitute.org/blogs/enterprising-investor/202...

2026: Europe's war economy - https://etedge-insights.com/featured-insights/geopolitics-an...

2026: The Irish Government is helping to usher in a new wartime economy in Europe - https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/2026/08/29/irish-minister...

Who has switched to a war time economy? Who wants such an economy for economic reasons and not security reasons?

One is not exclusive of the other. Do you really expect any European politician to tell the public that they are benefiting from the Russia-Ukraine war because of the increased defense spending? The fear-mongering in Europe, due to the war, is the only thing allowing many of them to increase military budgets without much opposition. (Look at the violent protests happening in France because the citizens fear that the government has, and will, cut back on social spending, and divert the money elsewhere).

Which country is economically benefiting from needing to increase defense spending as opposed to incurring the opportunity cost from needing to do it?

It's too much effort to write an answer here. (The new protests in Germany, like in France, is another symptom of the economic woes of EU members). But I've given you enough of a gist on the topic to do some research on your own if you are interested in learning more. There are plenty of resources on this topic online.

I don't understand. Can't they just borrow $40 trillion?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com