Fonte: https://yle.fi/a/74-20158072
Ho letto dei nuovi tagli alle tasse in Finlandia e sono onestamente confuso su chi stanno davvero aiutando.
Da quello che ho capito, sembra che la maggior parte dei benefici vanno ad alti guadagni, mentre le persone a basso e medio reddito non ottengono quasi nulla. Ad esempio, qualcuno che guadagna € 6000/mese risparmierebbe solo circa € 300 all’anno, mentre le persone che producono € 250.000+ risparmieranno oltre € 9.000 all’anno.
Inoltre, stanno rimuovendo la capacità di detrarre le quote di appartenenza all’Unione dalle tasse, che sembra un altro successo per i lavoratori ordinari. L’iscrizione a TEK da sola costa € 348/anno, quindi alla fine, molte persone potrebbero effettivamente perdere denaro invece di risparmiare.
Sono preoccupato che questo possa aumentare le divisioni di classe e indebolire ancora di più i sindacati, il che sembra piuttosto male per le condizioni di lavoro e per l’economia a lungo termine. Sembra uno spostamento verso un sistema più capitalista che favorisce i ricchi.
Sto vedendo questo nel modo sbagliato?
Cosa pensano tutti – c’è un’immagine di Biager qui che mi manca?
https://i.redd.it/aohgdizszdxe1.png
di Logical_Feedback_981
19 commenti
Why are you confused? The right wing coalition has given the rich tax cuts while increasing the national debt. This is a tale as old as democracy.
How does anyone justify cutting social services, education and health AND taxes?
Typical lol
The goal for the two main parties in cabinet is to destroy unions and increase class divide. It is what they aim to do, it is not some “unwanted side effect”.
There is at least some logic in lowering the income tax.
However, lowering corporate tax rates makes much less sense since it will, in all likelihood, make companies just pump out of more dividends. Moreover, Finland’s corporate tax rate wasn’t particularly high in the first place.
How efficient is your government?
Not surprising, but horrible. Gets to the core of gutting the welfare state. We’ve seen similar cuts under like Thatcher and Reagan. They work very specifically to move money up the ladder, so very much following the long term priorities of the government.
Was there not a class war in finland? I woulnt be surprised if it happens again.I believe it will if they succeed in dividing the classes.
Always nice to have more money.
Thankless assholes. Imagine getting tax relief and then literally complaining that percentages work like percentages and whoever nonimally makes more money gets a larger nonimal benefit. Equal treatment isn’t good enough for these complainers, nah, they demand preferential treatment.
That our government thinks people actually believe trickle down economics work.
Its good. We pay so much taxes so having somebody lowering them once is nice.
I’m very excited. This is the reason why I voted for Kokoomus.
It’s always a good idea to let people keep more of their own money.
Not sure if I understand the confusion… isn’t person who gains roughly 40 times pays much much more taxes, and it is ok for them to save more after cuts? Or do people want someone who pays as taxes ~3000 and someone who pays ~120000 receive same 300 euros cuts a year?
You are seeing it exactly the correct way. It’s also about the home office deduction, If you are working from home, and making less than 9000 per month you are basically losing money. For some people this is gonna be quite unpleasant.
In my opinion taxing income or wealth just for the purpose of reducing income/wealth caps is wrong, and the only point of view of this whole discussion is about how much the government will lose in tax revenue. It’s never about the people. Even social security and workers unions are never about the people. The leftist mindset is that everything belongs to the government and they just hand everyone an allowance of sorts, so then they come to the conclusion that cutting taxes from the top income brackets is TAKING AWAY money from the LOWER INCOME brackets and GIVING it to the “rich”. Like a reverse Robin Hood.
The income gaps in Finland are already very small. The difference in net earnings between the lowest 10% and the top 10% is not life changing. I honestly have no idea what “class divisons” people are so afraid of, everyone here is equally poor and keeps getting poorer. Look at any statistics that compare Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark and even Estonia and it’s painfully obvious that we can’t tax ourselves to riches.
I don’t know if this will actually help anything and there’s plenty of fair criticism to be made, but all of the criticism I see in the media is just straight socialist propaganda and pretend-shock. And of course, absolutely no real alternative solutions have been offered other than to raise taxes even more. Absolutely none, null, 0 solutions.
But that’s just my completely wrong and democracy-hating opinion, please feel free to angrily comment below.
Well, 20% of people pay 64% of the taxes so i think it’s not a sustainable situation. Not a big fan of the corporate tax decrease in this economic situation though
Why wouldn’t your example be fair? In your example the one earning 6k a month gets a 4% tax break and the one making 20k gets a 3,6% tax break. Perhaps they are both supposed to be 4%, but I see that both are getting an equal-ish tax break which is exactly fair.