Ça crise !
19 views | +0 today
Follow
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Jérôme Pinard
Scoop.it!

Maurice Allais expliquait la crise actuelle en ... 1999

Maurice Allais expliquait la crise actuelle en ... 1999 | Ça crise ! | Scoop.it

L’éclatante faillite du nouveau credo, par Maurice Allais (1999)

Le nouveau credo nous avait assuré qu’un fonctionnement libre de tous les marchés entraînerait nécessairement la prospérité pour chaque pays et pour chaque groupe social, dans un monde libéré de ses frontières économiques.

Mais, pour qui analyse objectivement les faits, la réalité, toute différente, est éclatante.

... cliquez sur l'image pour lire l'article complet.

Jérôme Pinard's insight:

Maurice Allais expliquait la crise actuelle en ... 1999

 

Qui est-il ?

C'est l'unique prix Nobel d'économie Français.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Jérôme Pinard
Scoop.it!

Taxer les plus values du PEA à 15,5 % ? L'état y réfléchit !

L'État veut taxer rétroactivement à 15,5% l'épargne longue des Français. C'est la rupture du contrat de confiance entre l'État français et les épargnants.
Jérôme Pinard's insight:

Pour sauver la Sécu, entreprise de droit privé, l'état songe à taxer à 15,5 % les plus values du PEA, rétroactivement !

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Jérôme Pinard
Scoop.it!

Le FMI propose de ponctionner 10 % de votre épargne pour sauver les finances publiques

Jérôme Pinard's insight:

p49 du Fiscal Monitor d'octobre 2013 - FMI


"...tax rate of about 10 percent on households with positive net wealth."


The sharp deterioration of the public finances in many countries has revived interest in a “capital levy”— a one-off tax on private wealth—as an exceptional measure to restore debt sustainability.

The appeal is that such a tax, if it is implemented before avoidance
is possible and there is a belief that it will never be repeated, does not distort behavior (and may be seen by some as fair). There have been illustrious supporters,
including Pigou, Ricardo, Schumpeter, and—until he changed his mind—Keynes. The conditions for success are strong, but also need to be weighed against the risks
of the alternatives, which include repudiating public debt or inflating it away (these, in turn, are a particular form of wealth tax—on bondholders—that also falls on
nonresidents).

There is a surprisingly large amount of experience to draw on, as such levies were widely adopted in Europe after World War I and in Germany and Japan after
World War II. Reviewed in Eichengreen (1990), this experience suggests that more notable than any loss ofcredibility was a simple failure to achieve debt reduction, largely because the delay in introduction gave space for extensive avoidance and capital flight—in turn spurring inflation.
The tax rates needed to bring down public debt to precrisis levels, moreover, are sizable: reducing debt ratios to end-2007 levels would require (for a sample of 15 euro area countries) a tax rate of about 10 percent on households with positive net wealth.
more...
No comment yet.