Search

They create a new super-authority that can investigate you without concrete suspicion, freeze and seize assets, take over companies, and ultimately confiscate property, even before any conviction. At the same time, they introduce new taxes on wealth that has already been taxed. #SurveillanceState #WealthTax #PropertyRights #Nospecificcountriesarementionedinthetweet.Thus #therearenocountrycodestoreturn.

Mark Carney s'apprête à imposer aux familles déjà en difficulté une hausse de 10 cents le litre de la taxe libérale sur l'essence. Les prix de l'essence ont grimpé en flèche de 25% au cours de la dernière année. Les Canadiens n'ont plus les moyens de payer ni l'essence ni l'épicerie et ils ne peuvent certainement pas se permettre une nouvelle augmentation de taxe. Signez pour éliminer toutes les taxes sur l'essence et permettre aux familles d'économiser jusqu'à 1000$ par an : https://t.co/B8bgES7Ce8 #Essence #Taxes #Canada

Ça relève quand même de la folie. En fait, ça semble complètement médiéval qu’un type élu pour cinq ans puisse disposer librement du chéquier des citoyens français Sans aucun contrôle. En plein naufrage. Alors qu’une partie du pays est à 10 € près. Essorée de factures incompressibles, de taxes diverses . La deuxième chose totalement extraordinaire, c’est que notre peuple le laisse faire. #France #Politique #Citoyenneté

Mark Carney a nommé l'un des plus influents libéraux à la tête de l’agence gouvernementale en charge du BS corporatif. Dominic Barton dirigeait McKinsey dans les années où la firme s’enrichissait en aidant Purdue Pharma à « aggraver » la crise des opioïdes. Dominic Barton présidait le Conseil consultatif sur l'économie de Trudeau quand les contrats fédéraux de McKinsey explosaient de trente fois pour dépasser les 200 millions de dollars, des contrats dont la vérificatrice générale a déterminé plus tard qu’ils bafouaient les règles. Maintenant, il va favoriser les gens bien connectés à obtenir des milliards en subventions payées par les taxes et impôts des Canadiens. Il est le même qui s’est rapproché du gouvernement communiste de Pékin chez McKinsey en allant jusqu’à travailler avec des entreprises d’État qui violent le droit international et qui refusent de condamner le génocide des Ouïghours. C'est simple, le club libéral s’enrichit aux dépens de tous les autres. #Politique #Libéralisme #Corruption

Hvor højt tror du staten er parat til at lade topskatten stige til? The Kennedy Tax Cuts of 1963–1964 In early 1963, the top marginal individual income tax rate in the United States stood at an extraordinary 91 percent—a legacy of the exceptionally high tax rates established during and after World War II. President John F. Kennedy proposed a sweeping tax overhaul, arguing that excessively high marginal rates were holding back private investment, risk-taking, employment, and economic growth. His original proposal would have reduced individual income tax rates across the board, lowering them from a range of 20–91 percent to 14–65 percent. It also called for reductions in corporate tax rates and stronger incentives for investment. Kennedy’s administration explicitly argued that lower tax rates would stimulate private economic activity, increase investment, and expand production and employment. The goal was not simply to reduce taxes, but to remove what Kennedy called the “heavy drag” that the existing tax system placed on private initiative. (Fraser) The proposal faced substantial opposition in Congress, particularly because of concerns about its fiscal implications and accompanying tax reforms. Nevertheless, the business community and many economic organizations strongly supported the central idea of substantial rate reductions. (Fraser) Kennedy did not live to see his proposal enacted. After his assassination in November 1963, President Lyndon B. Johnson made passage of the legislation a priority. The final measure, the Revenue Act of 1964, reduced the top marginal tax rate from 91 percent to 70 percent and substantially lowered individual and corporate tax rates. (Fraser) The economy subsequently entered a powerful and sustained expansion. Contemporary economic analyses attributed a significant portion of the improvement in production, employment, investment, and tax revenues to the cuts, although monetary policy and other factors also contributed. (Judiciary Committee)

The Fracture That Kills the Family The West’s deepest divide may not be left versus right, but whether young men and women still share a vision of the good life. The nuclear family is society’s foundation, yet households struggle to form when the sexes view each other as opponents. Many women see marriage as patriarchal; many men see women as manipulative or exploitative. Relationships shift from mutual union to zero-sum power struggles. Christianity framed marriage as union—two people becoming one. Nietzsche warned the death of God would remove a shared moral foundation, leaving society vulnerable to nihilism and fragmentation. We are living that fragmentation. Young men often retreat into pornography, gaming, and prolonged adolescence. Young women increasingly frame sexual liberation as empowerment. Both chase proximate pleasures while losing ultimate purposes: family, responsibility, continuity, and creating life. Dating data reflects the fracture: among unmarried Americans aged 22–35, only 26% of women and 36% of men are actively dating. Ideology filters matches too—Gen Z and young millennials cite political compatibility far more than Boomers. Research also finds a mismatch: only 0.6 single liberal men per single liberal woman, and only 0.5 single conservative women per conservative man. Cross-ideological pairing has risen from 6% in the 1970s to 22% today. The consequences extend beyond dating: fertility has fallen below replacement across much of the West, and 42% of American adults were unpartnered in 2023. Policy responses—tax incentives, parental leave, baby bonuses—miss the deeper cultural and spiritual problem: you can debate taxes, but it’s hard to build a family when you disagree on masculinity, whether marriage is oppressive, or whether family is worth sacrificing for. The values gap is the disease. The political divide is the symptom. The household is the casualty—and when it cracks, everything built above it loses stability. The question is whether a civilization can survive when the two people it most needs to unite can no longer agree why they should.

The Deadly Seduction of Democratic Socialism Young people are being urged to support “democratic” socialism—ideas blamed for tens of millions of deaths in the last century—promising that consent will make it work this time. But consent cannot make an economic system wise. A ballot cannot set the right prices for wages, goods, or services, nor prevent shortages, repression, or famine. This isn’t fringe. New York elected Zohran Mamdani, who says there should be no billionaires and backs rent freezes, state-run grocery stores, free CUNY, and higher taxes. Polling shows strong support for socialism and communism among Americans under 30. The core error is believing resources can be taken from creators and transferred without losing the knowledge that made them productive. Mao’s China illustrates the outcome: land reform dispossessed and killed landowners, production collapsed as local expertise was treated as an enemy, and grain seizures during the Great Leap Forward worsened a catastrophic famine. The lesson: destroying incentives, property rights, and local knowledge destroys production itself. Envy is often disguised as justice. Communist regimes cultivated resentment and turned grievance into political energy, making societies less focused on creating wealth and more focused on making others lose it. Even when central planners tried to subordinate families to the state, people preserved knowledge through markets, private plots, and community practice. Civilization isn’t a machine bureaucrats can redesign. Take away property and you don’t automatically transfer knowledge—abundance can vanish with it. Redistribution may promise equality, but if it destroys the people, incentives, and knowledge that produce abundance, the result is a hungry one.

The Three Words Democracy Borrows Democracy is often praised as inherently good, but Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates saw serious flaws. A better view: rule by one, few, or many each has tradeoffs. A healthy society ideally combines a strong leader, a competent elite, and a virtuous citizenry—because, as Thomas Sowell said, “there are no solutions, only tradeoffs.” Democracy promises three virtues it can’t guarantee: freedom, wisdom, and consent. **Freedom:** Nozick’s thought experiment shows how slavery can be disguised by changing vocabulary—when power gradually shifts from overt domination to rules voted on by others, at what point is it “freedom”? A society can talk endlessly about freedom while restricting rights through taxes, regulations, and suspensions. **Wisdom:** Socrates doubted democracy produces wisdom. If a voyage were dangerous, you wouldn’t let every passenger vote equally on navigation. Yet political voting gives equal weight regardless of knowledge, inviting manipulation by those skilled in fear, emotion, and flattery. **Consent:** “Government of the people, by the people, for the people” can be an illusion. If the state is treated as “us,” coercion can be reframed as self-government. But representatives don’t truly follow your instructions the way a genuine agent must. Freedom, wisdom, and consent are real virtues—democracy just borrows their language, and the biggest risk is believing that choosing rulers collectively makes the ruled free, wise, and consenting.

🇪🇺 EUROPE NEEDS A LABOUR MARKET REVOLUTION Europe is running out of workers, companies cannot find staff, families struggle to combine children and careers, and governments still punish work with some of the highest taxes in the world. The answer is not more bureaucracy. The https://t.co/VuVgLMSL1o #LabourMarket #Europe #WorkRevolution #EU

🇪🇺 EUROPE NEEDS A LABOUR MARKET REVOLUTION Europe is running out of workers, companies cannot find staff, families struggle to combine children and careers, and governments still punish work with some of the highest taxes in the world. The answer is not more bureaucracy. The https://t.co/4ddnUOTL2t #LabourMarket #Europe #WorkRevolution #EU

The government has changed position on fuel taxes 4 times in 6 months. They are making it up as they go along. Aontú opposes any increase in fuel tax. https://t.co/Bk37EtEYaN #FuelTax #Aontú #GovernmentPolicy #Nospecificcountrycodesarementionedinthetweet.

Bruno Le Maire, former Minister of the Economy, proposes in his manifesto to massively reduce payroll charges to narrow the gap between gross and net pay, while sourcing new taxes on consumption and large fortunes, asserting that our social model will no longer be funded by work. (translated)