Depardieu goes Galt?

posted at 8:51 am on December 17, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Not exactly, although I love Instapundit’s headline.  Going Galt means removing your talents from the world altogether until the world comes to its senses.  The French film icon has instead decided to continue providing the world his talents, but for the future having a Belgian address from which to provide them:

Gérard Depardieu has said he is handing back his French passport and social security card, lambasting the French government for punishing “success, creation, talent” in his homeland.

A popular and colourful figure in France, the 63-year-old actor is the latest wealthy Frenchman to seek shelter outside his native country by buying a house just over the border in Belgium in response to tax increases by the Socialist president, François Hollande.

The prime minister, Jean-Marc Ayrault, described Depardieu’s behaviour as pathetic and unpatriotic at a time when the French are being asked to pay higher taxes to reduce a bloated national debt.

“Pathetic, you said pathetic? How pathetic is that?” Depardieu said in a letter to the weekly newspaper le Journal du Dimanche.

“I am leaving because you believe that success, creation, talent, anything different must be sanctioned,” he said.

The arguments in this dispute are very revealing.  Depardieu’s critics in France are heaving volcanoes of emotion, tossing out accusations of unpatriotism and “pathetic” selfishness.  Depardieu, on the other hand, offers the rational argument that (a) he has the resources to choose his tax regime, (b) he has no particular reason to fund Hollande’s socialist tax policies, so (c) he’s moving to Belgium.

To paraphrase from a movie in which Depardieu did not appear — it’s not personal, mon cher.  It’s business.  Except, of course, the French government wants to make it personal.  They want to appeal to patriotism, as if anyone ever pledges allegiance to a tax code, precisely because they can’t win the argument on either rationality or business.  Hiking taxes in France will do exactly what it will do in the US — force the wealthy who are already providing the lion’s share of income-tax revenue to decide whether to stay put, push capital into markets where it’s welcomed rather than punished, and drive revenues down instead of up when the economy declines as a result of both.

So no, Depardieu isn’t going Galt.  He’s simply choosing a better market for his capital.

And one last question, prompted by the commenters in our Headline thread: What government in history has ever “asked” its citizens to pay taxes?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Love it!

royzer on December 17, 2012 at 8:57 AM

It’s a French version of going “going Galt”. I think it’s called “going Charles De Gaullt”.

GCM on December 17, 2012 at 9:02 AM

Good for him.

If the French get snotty toward him and his work because of this, he’s just won a bunch of American fans and probably a fair number of Belgians as well. Though it’s not like the French to get snotty over stuff, right?

Gingotts on December 17, 2012 at 9:02 AM

Going Galt means removing your talents from the world altogether until the world comes to its senses.

Not going to happen. Not in my lifetime. Not in my country. Sigh.

the_moll on December 17, 2012 at 9:03 AM

Hopefully, for Depardieu’s sake, a Belgian diet will be lower in carbs.

Catahoula on December 17, 2012 at 9:03 AM

Liberals: Give us your money and shut up.

darwin on December 17, 2012 at 9:05 AM

I always did like a lot of his French flicks(not so much, his American ones). Good to hear that there’s a fiscal conservative buried inside of him.

Doughboy on December 17, 2012 at 9:05 AM

…so when are people going to be moving out of Hollywood?

KOOLAID2 on December 17, 2012 at 9:08 AM

…so when are people going to be moving out of Hollywood?

KOOLAID2 on December 17, 2012 at 9:08 AM

I keep telling my left-coast right-winger friends they should move out of the liberal enclaves, but most of them have emotional attachments to family that won’t move and landmarks that can’t. I only hope and pray that they don’t get caught up in the worst of the collapse when it finally happens.

gryphon202 on December 17, 2012 at 9:12 AM

Depe said it best himself, he’s paying 75% of his income to the government and has in his career paid out an estimated $130 million Euros in taxes.

Unintended consequences, you socialist jackoffs, welcome to reality.

Bishop on December 17, 2012 at 9:13 AM

Any chance we can replace Boehner with him?

changer1701 on December 17, 2012 at 9:15 AM

Clapping here. This will start happening state to state here in the US.

I will bet you dollars to donuts there will be states that will say they will ignore the federal ban on so-called assault rifles. How popular will they be?

hawkdriver on December 17, 2012 at 9:18 AM

The French may not understand it but Gérard Depardieu is their biggest patriot.

FireBlogger on December 17, 2012 at 9:20 AM

What do you think Obama’s “New Economic Patriotism” is?

IF we hadn’t long ago allowed the Left to mis-define the word “fascist,” people would know exactly what Obama is.

SAMinVA on December 17, 2012 at 9:20 AM

I just gained a whole lot of new respect for Gerard Depardieu.

Bravo, monsieur! Bravo!

Rixon on December 17, 2012 at 9:23 AM

This reminds me of Rush Limbaugh’s tax problems with the state of New York. Remember when Limbaugh finally left for good, the governor said good riddance. Could not even thank Limbaugh for the millions in taxes that went to the state.

esr1951 on December 17, 2012 at 9:24 AM

I’m sure everyone with a modicum of wealth wants to pay more in taxes so the liberals can continue to spend other people’s money on their failed social experiments. Even the left, when good fortune smiles on them, squeals like stuck pigs when their ox is gored.

iamsaved on December 17, 2012 at 9:27 AM

They should really have not attacked him personally. What was that suppose to accomplish? Shame him in changing his mind? They aren’t going after the others who are leaving the country.

Blake on December 17, 2012 at 9:27 AM

I’m plotting my move out of California.. This years expected annual taxes, just the taxes would cover a full years payments on a very nice view home elsewhere- say Lake Tahoe.

Tired of a target being on my back

theblacksheepwasright on December 17, 2012 at 9:30 AM

Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. So I guess this means the French government is a bunch of scoundrels.

Odysseus on December 17, 2012 at 9:34 AM

Gerard Depardieu is an a**hole, and he should not be held up as an example of anything. There are certainly other examples of tax flight -name most any American city- that could be employed to illustrate the folly of over-taxation.

M240H on December 17, 2012 at 9:34 AM

…so when are people going to be moving out of Hollywood?

KOOLAID2 on December 17, 2012 at 9:08 AM

Why would they do it? That’s where they make money. And if you think that they pay too much taxes on their millions, you don’t understand how tax attorneys and trust funds work.

Archivarix on December 17, 2012 at 9:35 AM

…shows you how fluked up France has become!…that guy’s considered a sex symbol!

KOOLAID2 on December 17, 2012 at 9:35 AM

The successful people did not become successful for being stupid. The rich are voting with their feet in France and the UK. Barry and the Dems think that the “rich” are just meat on the carving board. They will wake up to the reality of their economic and behavioral naivety soon.

galtani on December 17, 2012 at 9:36 AM

Primarily, he’s just good at math. Even at U.S existing rates ( for the moment ) falling just slightly in arrears to the IRS snowballs into major problems. Often ones that take years to finally straighten out!

At Euro-levels, falling behind for whatever trivial or arbitrary reason, means the END. And ramping up your income to pay it off simply isn’t an option. You’ll owe on that windfall as well, leaving you worse off than you were before. Just ask the Rolling Stones when sent into “Exile” from the U.K in the early 70′s? Ironically, going to France…

We all have tax ‘problems’ ( we just don’t know it yet )

Marshall_Will on December 17, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Envious. This is sweet irony since the US is the only country in the world that taxes one’s worldwide income. Escape is futile, short of turning in your passport. And I love OOTM too much to do that…. Lake Tahoe, here we come.

FerdtheMoonCat on December 17, 2012 at 9:38 AM

To answer the question at the end of the blog post, the central government under the Articles of Confederation asked the individual states to pay taxes on a voluntary basis because it lacked the power of taxation. Didn’t work out so well though.

kclibby on December 17, 2012 at 9:38 AM

Why would they do it? That’s where they make money. And if you think that they pay too much taxes on their millions, you don’t understand how tax attorneys and trust funds work.

Archivarix on December 17, 2012 at 9:35 AM

…but…but…but JugEars is going to close all the loopholes….he…he promised!

KOOLAID2 on December 17, 2012 at 9:39 AM

All economic curves show that at some price revenue begins to decline. People change their behavior based upon economics once the pain becomes to much.

Somehow libs and socialists believe taxes (except cigarette taxes) are exempt from this idea.

jpmn on December 17, 2012 at 9:44 AM

jpmn said,

All economic curves show that at some price revenue begins to decline.

Thanks, but no need for chart ‘worship’. In the end, “Nothing cures high prices ( quite like high prices taxes! ) Threshold MET!

Marshall_Will on December 17, 2012 at 9:48 AM

I was reading about his home: he lives in the St Germain district of Paris and his home is considered a historical monument and asking price starts at 50 million Euros. This is major PR damage to the socialists and I’m a big fan now.

Marcus on December 17, 2012 at 9:53 AM

My favorite part:

“Who are you to judge me, I ask you Mr Ayrault, prime minister of Mr Hollande? Despite my excesses, my appetite and my love of life, I remain a free man,” (Gerard) Depardieu wrote.

Fallon on December 17, 2012 at 9:55 AM

How pathetic is it that the governments want to redistribute your earned wealth. That’s confiscation at best; but is slavery in fact. You do not have a right to the fruits of your labor.

Not for nothing did the Founders require that all taxes must be shared equally, based on enumeration. The abhorance of selective ‘taking’ was strong, and it took a constitutional amendment to re-introduce unequal treatment of citizenry. And the 16th Amendment authorizing Income Taxes was long after the “Due Process” and “equal treatment” clauses of the 14th Amendment.

The 16th Amendment is our new slave-master. We need to overthrow it. Entirely.

ss396 on December 17, 2012 at 10:00 AM

He’s a lousy actor anyway!

/hollywood liberals

CurtZHP on December 17, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Depardieu remaind French and loved by the French, despite bidding the French rulers adieu. Interesting turn of events. As in America, people in Europe (due in no small part to the Euro debacle) are coming to terms with their national identities outside and apart from their respective governments. Despite government of, by and for the People, a nation’s government is not the same as its people.

shuzilla on December 17, 2012 at 10:10 AM

So, what countries are likely to benefit most from all of the rich people, including Americans, moving in to avoid taxes?

Might be a good place to look for work.

hawksruleva on December 17, 2012 at 10:20 AM

How pathetic is it that the governments want to redistribute your earned wealth. That’s confiscation at best; but is slavery in fact. You do not have a right to the fruits of your labor.

Not for nothing did the Founders require that all taxes must be shared equally, based on enumeration. The abhorance of selective ‘taking’ was strong, and it took a constitutional amendment to re-introduce unequal treatment of citizenry. And the 16th Amendment authorizing Income Taxes was long after the “Due Process” and “equal treatment” clauses of the 14th Amendment.

The 16th Amendment is our new slave-master. We need to overthrow it. Entirely.

ss396 on December 17, 2012 at 10:00 AM

Unfortunately, nobody in the GOP seems able to articulate the problem as well as you do. All they can say is “tax increases will hurt the economy”. A vigourous defense along the lines of “everyone should be allowed to keep the money they earn” would appeal to people.

hawksruleva on December 17, 2012 at 10:23 AM

The successful people did not become successful for being stupid. The rich are voting with their feet in France and the UK. Barry and the Dems think that the “rich” are just meat on the carving board. They will wake up to the reality of their economic and behavioral naivety soon.

galtani on December 17, 2012 at 9:36 AM

The figure they can get money from U.S. citizens no matter where they live. And they use the same “it’s your patriotic duty” argument. But government isn’t a charity – people don’t just give to it. The vast majority lower their tax payment as much as possible. And rich people can do more in that regard than poorer folks.

hawksruleva on December 17, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Perhaps someone here can help me out. I’m trying to dig up a recent post from, I believe it was either here at Hotair or over at Ace of Spades. The gist of the post was a breakdown about how a California household earning about a $65k income actually had less disposable income than a household earning $35k. Does anybody remenber that post? Its driving me crazy.

Zetterson on December 17, 2012 at 10:33 AM

…so when are people going to be moving out of Hollywood?
KOOLAID2 on December 17, 2012 at 9:08 AM

That’s been going on for quite a few years now. At first actors and actresses were thrilled to go to “exotic” locations like New Zealand and South America to make films. But after a while they realized that’s where they were spending most of their time, because that’s where studios are now doing most of their filming because it’s cheaper there.

If an actor has a place in LA or New York now, it’s because that’s where he goes for publicity tours and TV appearances. But more and more of their actual acting is going on overseas. The so-called “vacation” photos in all the tabloids nowadays are really taken where the actors spend most of their lives.

logis on December 17, 2012 at 10:35 AM

I was reading about his home: he lives in the St Germain district of Paris and his home is considered a historical monument and asking price starts at 50 million Euros. This is major PR damage to the socialists and I’m a big fan now.

Marcus on December 17, 2012 at 9:53 AM

I suspect that it is not covered by the 75% tax. If it is, what a hit!

Blake on December 17, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Hiking taxes in France will do exactly what it will do in the US — force the wealthy who are already providing the lion’s share of income-tax revenue to decide whether to stay put, push capital into markets where it’s welcomed rather than punished, and drive revenues down instead of up when the economy declines as a result of both.

As France is learning, they will simply leave, because they can. All over Europe they are experiencing “deposit flight.” People are taking their money out of the system, converting and or hiding it.

dogsoldier on December 17, 2012 at 10:43 AM

hawksruleva on December 17, 2012 at 10:26 AM

You are correct. Look at John Kerry and Fauxcahontas, for example…

dogsoldier on December 17, 2012 at 10:45 AM

The 16th Amendment is our new slave-master. We need to overthrow it. Entirely.
ss396 on December 17, 2012 at 10:00 AM

Before the Constitutional prohibition against income tax was removed, the vast majority of government revenue came from PROPERTY taxes.

That’s why I keep saying “Tax the rich!” is yet another liberal lie. That is literally the last thing in the world people like Soros, Kerry-Heinz, Pelosi and the Kennedys want to do!

Income taxes don’t punish people who HAVE wealth; they only punish the people who CREATE wealth. It may be the single stupidest idea for raising government revenues ever invented — and that’s saying a whole hell of a lot.

logis on December 17, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Monsieur Depardieu makes Anderson Cooper giggle “Depar-two!

:P

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 17, 2012 at 11:01 AM

From what I know of France and the French, this would really get to them—and it did!

stillings on December 17, 2012 at 11:08 AM

So I guess he’s going to give back the millions French tax payers have given to subsidize the industry in which he made his fortune? Nope, I thought not.

lostmotherland on December 17, 2012 at 11:48 AM

The arguments in this dispute are very revealing. Depardieu’s critics in France are heaving volcanoes of emotion, tossing out accusations of unpatriotism and “pathetic” selfishness.

So much for the “concept” of the EU, I guess? LOL. The French are always “the French”.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on December 17, 2012 at 12:08 PM

I’ve always been a fan of Depardieu, but now I’m a BIG fan. I love the way he responded to his critics. Just fantastic. Maybe he will become a conservative.

debiesam on December 17, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Shouldn’t the taxes in every EU country be the same?

Where’s the E Unity?

The French-speaking Belgians will welcome the new member of their internal independence movement.

profitsbeard on December 17, 2012 at 12:49 PM

So I guess he’s going to give back the millions French tax payers have given to subsidize the industry in which he made his fortune? Nope, I thought not.

lostmotherland on December 17, 2012 at 11:48 AM

He’s paid 120 million since he was 14. I’ll concede I don’t know what if any the French Government subsidizes their entertainment industry. But he he pay it back all by himself? Should the French People who are beneficiaries of receiving that entertainment also pay?

You’re batting a grand for idiotic thought processes here today.

hawkdriver on December 17, 2012 at 12:51 PM

I wonder if this will kill his career? It will in the U.S. and I would think Europe is worse.

Cindy Munford on December 17, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Perhaps someone here can help me out. I’m trying to dig up a recent post from, I believe it was either here at Hotair or over at Ace of Spades. The gist of the post was a breakdown about how a California household earning about a $65k income actually had less disposable income than a household earning $35k. Does anybody remember that post? Its driving me crazy.

Zetterson on December 17, 2012 at 10:33 AM

Here you go from the Daily Caller.

The cash value of welfare spending, according to the analysis, is $167.65 daily per household in poverty. The median household income in 2011 was $50,054 or $137.13 per day, according to the analysis, released Friday.

Fallon on December 17, 2012 at 12:57 PM

So I guess he’s going to give back the millions French tax payers have given to subsidize the industry in which he made his fortune? Nope, I thought not.

lostmotherland on December 17, 2012 at 11:48 AM

The taxpayers subsidize comedy? Because comedy is his industry.

HotAirian on December 17, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Yeah, well, filmmaking is heavily subsidized in France (otherwise refined French films would not stand a chance against the onslaught of base American movies). For example, 20% of the funding for The Artist, which won an Oscar last year, was from public sources. That’s on top of the €3.2 million Canal Plus, the country’s biggest cable network contributed to the movie. You see, Canal Plus’s is required by law to invest 12% of its revenue in French movies, which is just another form of taxing them.

Why is this relevant? Because M. Depardieu has profited from this system earlier in his career — when others did the paying — so I’m not exactly impressed that now, when it’s his turn to contribute, he is going Galt. I think it’s cool to be Clint Eastwood and deride Socialism, never having gone to the public trough for feeding. But in my book, Depardieu is just a freeloader.

Time Lord on December 17, 2012 at 1:39 PM

This is why we must say a firm no to all revenue increases, no matter how “temporary” they are promised to be.

Because to the liberals, it’s never ever enough.

Forget that this man has contributed more to the public exchequeur than two thousand of his countrymen ever will in a lifetime. He’s a rich person, and rich people are evil, and because.

JoseQuinones on December 17, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Why is this relevant? Because M. Depardieu has profited from this system earlier in his career — when others did the paying — so I’m not exactly impressed that now, when it’s his turn to contribute, he is going Galt. I think it’s cool to be Clint Eastwood and deride Socialism, never having gone to the public trough for feeding. But in my book, Depardieu is just a freeloader.

Time Lord on December 17, 2012 at 1:39 PM

If you give a gift without asking for anything in return then don’t claim that you are owed anything. If you want something back for your transaction (which is, obviously NOT a gift) then make it explicit.

France didn’t subsidize films in order to enrich Depardieu or any other individual in films. They did it to give FRANCE a leg up in the world film industry. i.e. France did it for itself. If they wanted the subsidies to be nothing but loans, then they should have been civilized and written out such contracts. But, they didn’t. They subsidized their industry in order to beat Hollywood up (as if they could, LOL). Tough.

I really get sick of people who don’t understand even the simplest aspects of gift-giving. At least, I know never to accept any gifts from you, since they all come with serious strings attached – and who knows what you would demand in the future for your pathetic “gifts” now?

Either France is a free country or it isn’t. Either the EU is a borderless union or it isn’t. I get tired of the hypocrisy from the left. They are totally pathetic. And nasty, too.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on December 17, 2012 at 1:47 PM

Doughboy on December 17, 2012 at 9:05 AM

“Green Card” was pretty good.

Solaratov on December 17, 2012 at 1:48 PM

So I guess he’s going to give back the millions French tax payers have given to subsidize the industry in which he made his fortune? Nope, I thought not.

lostmotherland on December 17, 2012 at 11:48 AM

Why should he?

He was hired to do a job (act) at a certain salary. He did the job and was paid his salary.

Why should he return anything simply because he has decided to relocate?

Of course, you fascists only believe in honoring a contract…until you don’t.

You fascists have no honor at all.

(I know. You don’t understand that…because you have been propagandized into believing that [we] owe everything to the state; and because of your inbred stupidity and mental deficiency, you aren’t able to reason for yourself and deduce why that is wrong. Don’t worry your little pin-head about it. Just stay content to be a serf and a lickspittle for your masters.)

Solaratov on December 17, 2012 at 2:02 PM

How do you say Tea Bagger in French?

ardenenoch on December 17, 2012 at 2:17 PM

What is really fascinating here is that Liberals for Years have been saying that Patriotism is “Jingoistic” and we all need to bow to the new world order of no Nations.

So when a citizen runs away from a high tax Nation he is “unpatriotic” but if he waves the flag, believes in the Constitution and loves his Country for what it stands for and pays his taxes, he is a “Jingoistic” right wing neanderthal that needs to be eliminated so that Liberals can usher in the New World order.

Liberalism is a Mental disorder

Bulletchaser on December 17, 2012 at 2:23 PM

I’m sure everyone with a modicum of wealth wants to pay more in taxes so the liberals can continue to spend other people’s money on their failed social experiments. Even the left, when good fortune smiles on them, squeals like stuck pigs when their ox is gored.

iamsaved on December 17, 2012 at 9:27 AM

Heh. Waiting for Meggie mac to chime in with her “emoticon”… /sarc

if she had an opinbion, I’m sure it’ll be on the side of “patriotism is paying what you’re asked to pay”.

AH_C on December 17, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Lets see if France wants to implement directive 10-289.

I take issue that leaving France isn’t going Galt. It is. Depardieu stopped living in France, and is, for tax purposes of France, gone Galt. John Galt of Atlas Shrugged didn’t have anywhere else to go, and the U.S. was the only ‘motor’ still running. Depardieu has just shut down his part of France’s ‘motor’ and is now contributing to a country that is not so punitive.

http://conservapedia.com/Directive_10-289

Oddly, Conservapedia mentions the open source movement “information wants to be free” but fails to mention that information costs money to develop, and that patents allow the inventing entity time to take advantage of its invention to recoup those costs and reward the inventor.

zonataman on December 17, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Canada is culturally similar to the United States, and there is a Conservative Prime Minister. I’m sure people far wealthier than I am have noticed this also.

thuja on December 17, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Canada is culturally similar to the United States, and there is a Conservative Prime Minister. I’m sure people far wealthier than I am have noticed this also.

thuja on December 17, 2012 at 2:49 PM

The big problem with Canada is that it still has the silly Euro-style, collectivist, party-oriented parliamentary system that is leftist at its very foundation. There might be glimpses of some sort of American-style conservativism from time to time but the overarching path of all such nations is towards leftism, as their governments are founded on it and based in it. You can never be secure in a country such as that as there is no real separation of government branches and no real limits on what they can do. Just by normal entropic pressure, they always move left over time.

We have seen how hard it is to maintain these important aspects of government – decentralized, individualistic, and limited – when they are part of our law. You can imagine how much more difficult such a mission is in a nation where those aspects aren’t part of any law and are, generally, foreign to their governance.

The US was the first, last, and only place that true individual freedom existed – as written into the architecure of our government. That’s why the leftists refused to leave America but made it their mission to break us … and they finally have with their ineligible Indonesian. It just gets uglier from here. This is why the only real solution is either to move to a nation you have a specific attachment to (as you will find that it is not like America and will never be) or for us to have a national divorce to re-establish a nation that will carry the American creed into the future, as the American Socialist Superstate is certainly not that vehicle.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on December 17, 2012 at 2:58 PM

Going Galt means removing your talents from the world altogether until the world comes to its senses.

I’m not sure John Galt believed the world would come to it’s senses. He and his followers believed they had to let the world destroy itself before they could rebuild it.

“He stepped to the window and pointed to the skyscrapers of the city. He said that we had to extinguish the lights of the world, and when we would see the lights of New York go out, we would know that our job was done.”

MichaelGabriel on December 17, 2012 at 3:05 PM

He should have turned it around on these pathetic tyrants and thieves.

“It’s selfish to steal what is not yours”.

See progressives always use moral arguments in tax debates.

They claim it’s immoral not to help the poor.

Yet it’s their immoral desire to steal that’s a huge contradiction.

It’s moral to GIVE to the poor.

It’s IMMORAL to STEAL and then supposedly give to the poor.

And the bankers, and the unions, and the green energy companies..

They’re completely and entirely immoral.

fatlibertarianinokc on December 17, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Given the way France taxes, Depardieu could simply move and not have to change the way he recieved his remuneration. Therefore he can vote with his feet. Should France change the way it taxes, he will then adjust how he gets paid or compensated into whatever fashion that would yield him the best tradeoff between his lifestyle needs and taxes.

Perhaps he might continue to work and get paid in Euros in a fashion that can be taxed, but he could also choose to do more social work, get paid in kind or benefits, or just plain retire. Depends on where the necessary tradeoffs lead him.

Russ808 on December 17, 2012 at 3:26 PM

You know what’s really tragic? Bastiat is unknown in his own country.

Rae on December 17, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Lol! Let the Financial Defections Begin! Money’s running from the evil Govt’s trying to separate those who have money, from it. Well, at least the French will pay for their arrogance. Unfortunately, so will everyone else, sooner or later.

http://www.paratisiusa.blogspot.com

God Bless America!

paratisi on December 17, 2012 at 4:55 PM

By Ed’s definition, John Galt, Francisco d’Anconia, Ragnar Danneskjöld & the rest of the gang didn’t “go Galt” either; they merely chose “a better market for [their] capital,” which happened to be in a hidden valley in the State of Colorado.

Depardieu went Galt.

BCrago66 on December 17, 2012 at 8:24 PM

The prime minister, Jean-Marc Ayrault, described Depardieu’s behaviour as pathetic and unpatriotic at a time when the French are being asked to pay higher taxes to reduce a bloated national debt.

It is exquisitely French to described the man you failed to rob as ‘pathetic’

This brings to memory the Maginot Line, the line of defensive bunkers France built along the German borders, as if to dare the Germans to cross

While the fortification system successfully prevented a direct attack, it was strategically ineffective, as the Germans invaded through Belgium, defeating the French army. Flanked the Maginot Line, through the Ardennes forest and via the Low countries, completely sweeping by the line and conquering France in about 6 weeks.[1] As such, reference to the Maginot Line is used to recall a strategy or object that people hope will prove effective but instead fails miserably. It is also the best known symbol of the adage that “generals always fight the last war, especially if they have won it” – wikipedia

So they have won the cow, but the calf got away. How unpatriotic, this fattened calf

Descartes, 1637: Je pense donc je sui. I think, therefore I am

France, 2012: I eat, therefore I tax

entagor on December 18, 2012 at 9:11 AM

The US was the first, last, and only place that true individual freedom existed – as written into the architecure of our government

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on December 17, 2012 at 2:58 PM

Every social studies class should begin with your wonderful post

I was reading Swedish news. Christmas at the Daycare:

However she chose to be an angel.
Unfortunately, her teachers denied her wish.
When she asked why, they explained that angels were not on the list of culturally mandated Swedish Christmas characters.

The insensitive brown Gingerbread Man

A 10-year-old was told he could not dress up as a gingerbread man at his school’s traditional Lucia celebration as all references to the cookie had been banned in order to avoid offence.

Meanwhile the list of new laws for the new year in the micromanaged world of Sweden

entagor on December 18, 2012 at 9:43 AM