Search results

if ffp doesnt take into account whether or not a sponsorship is done on market terms, then :sergio:

Are you aware that if Marseille wins tomorrow against Evian, they'll be six points ahead of Paris? And if Lyon wins tomorrow against Lille, they'll be four points ahead of Paris?

Well

Now that's a dirty City.

I did and do understand it. But I guess you can take my place in Copenhagen, when I go on my yearly trip to Paris.

PSG isn't worthy of Paris.

Denmark's loss.

If you vote on a system which is based on capitalism (often Keynes) then you can be called a supporter of capitalism or a sort of capitalism. Anyways not that important. The point being [most] Europe is capitalistic. ---------- Post added 17.08.2012 at 23:13 ---------- Of course coming from...

Indeed. It's a very often used argument against increasing the taxes in a country. Yet some of the countries in the world with the highest (income) taxes are doing very well. Too often is education, the work conditions, support from local government, spending power of the population and so on...

Actually there's a thing called The Laffer Curve (you probably know that already) which tries to find the magic number where an increase in income tax (marginal) will decrease the income the state gets. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve - Quite interesting

You took my joke about americans serious :lol: I guess a smiley was needed. Do I need to remind you that most of Europe and it's population are supporters of capitalism (tho under some control) :)

What about Liberal or Conservative countries spending too much? Is that also a socialist thing. There's nothing in the Social Democratic model that suggest long term debt is a good thing.

Just to clarify. France isn't a socialist country, but a Social Democratic country. And yes americans, there's a huge difference.