Jacques Chirac is calling for an international tax to help fight international poverty. And guess what he wants to tax? Arms sales, including gun purchases by individuals. Fighting poverty? Good idea. Taxing a gun purchase I make to do it? Piss off.
You know who that tax is going to hit? Americans. This is a proposed tax to take more money out of the hands of Americans and give it to (presumably) the United Nations. Well, after the oil for food thing, no thanks. And why just Americans? Because we have the right to purchase firearms. Any revenue from France? Nope. Britain, Canada, Switzerland, Australia? Nope.
This is just more anti-Americanism from the French. Thanks for the help back in 1781, but let me ask you a question, Jacques. Do you speak German? No? You're welcome.
Article comments
1 - Damon Muma
Yeah it probably would hit Americans hardest. They're the ones who for some reason feel owning a gun is super important. I personally don't know anyone who has a gun, except my uncles old hunting rifles that are now nonfunctional. And I don't want a gun either. A nice high tax on cigarettes might be more logical.. but the whole tax on guns is a pretty elegant solution.
2 - Evilwhiteguy
No way in hell Chirac would propose that. That would affect Russia and many Asian countries way more than it would the US, and maybe France, too, I don't know their statistics as far as smokers as a part of the population. Cigarettes are legal (as far as I know) in every country, and poor people smoke, so taxing them to get them out of poverty wouldn't make sense, even to a Frenchman. Well, maybe I give them too much credit there...
But those "evil" Americans who buy guns, they "deserve" to be taxed.
3 - Jason Koulouras
Evilwhiteguy, is it the concept of a tax on weapons that repulses you or the fact that it was proposed by M. Chirac?
4 - Eric Olsen
I like the smoking tax idea, but why wouldn't the individual gun sales tax affect anyone but the U.S.? I didn't see anyting about that in the article.
The real difference between a tax and aid is the matter of compulsion, and no matter who is "compulsed," they are going to object.
Something has to be done, however, the gap between the haves and have-nots just keeps widening and that is not to anyone's advantage.
5 - Evilwhiteguy
Jason,
Mostly, it is the fact that the "international community" thinks they can put a tax on us, so the second part of your question would be what repulses me.
And Eric, personal handgun ownership is banned in most other countries, that's why it would mostly just affect us.
6 - RedTard
I can't believe US citizens are actually debating whether international organizations should be able to tax us. Were ready to basically give up our soverignty to a world government. That's great when your a third world country with nothing to lose. We are the richest country in the world and we have very little to gain by the move.
What Chirac is really suggesting is world socialism. Poor countries are poor because of bad government, corruption, and poor social constructs. By giving money to those countries we just prop up the bad systems that are in place.
7 - Eric Olsen
as always, education and ground floor assistance are what is most needed and most effective. For example, micro-loans seem to do a lot of good and inspire entrepreneurship
8 - Damon Muma
"We are the richest country in the world and we have very little to gain by the move."
Imaaaagine alll the peeeople...
The key is just becoming less of a nationalist and more of a humanist and then you won't mind ;)
9 - RJ
I'm all for a tax on wine, snails, and cheese. Is Mr. Chirac?