From Canada Free Press:
How Rich Are European Socialists and Marxists?
By Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh
May 14, 2012
The Socialist Francois Hollande is a very rich man. The newly elected president of France has three holiday homes on the Riviera, north of Cannes. Pretending to “dislike the rich,” the “gauche caviar” Hollande is very rich himself.
[h]e has assets of one million British pounds. In addition, the “champagne Socialist” owns a “palatial villa in Mougins, the hilltop Cannes suburb where Pablo Picasso used to live” and two apartments close to the promenade in Cannes. The three villas in Cannes were valued at 800,000 Euros, 230,000 Euros, and 140,000 Euros. Hollande lives with his girlfriend in a well-appointed apartment in Paris.
Attacking the rich who “do not pay their fair share” is just a campaign ploy to pretend that a president cares for the poor. In reality, he is only interested in sharing other people’s money and wealth, not his own.
How do Socialists/Marxists acquire wealth? I am not sure how Mr. Hollande acquired his fortune, perhaps he took entrepreneurial advantage of the very capitalist system he abhors and maligns.
I do know how many communist elites and their loyal lackeys became millionaires and billionaires in Romania. During the terror reign of Nicolae Ceausescu, they pillaged and confiscated private property from all citizens but particularly the wealth of those who owned multiple homes, land, paintings, gold coins, cars, and jewelry.
Many communists had huge bank accounts in Switzerland and lived like kings while the population starved, fearing for their lives daily, and lucky to be alive. Shortly after Ceausescu and his wife Elena were executed on Christmas 1989, several billion dollars worth of financial aid earmarked for economic development in Romania, disappeared without a trace. To this day, it has not been found, and nobody was held accountable for its disappearance.
Before Romania became part of the European Union in January 2007, the IMF offered loans to individual entrepreneurs to start businesses. The terms were quite lax and no collateral was required. Honest citizens, who had no idea how they would repay millions of Euros, avoided such loans. Dishonest citizens bee-lined to get loans. Businesses went bust and did not have to repay a dime of the squandered capital. Some entrepreneurs were successful but with a lot of corruption and graft.
After 1989, politicians, their families, and former communist party apparatchiks started selling the property of the state to the highest foreign bidders without any input or accountability, and pocketed the money. Regulatory institutions and judges were bribed and nobody went to jail.
All the means of production, previously controlled by the state, were broken up bit by bit, sold, and privatized while the “proletariat” watched in dismay. The working class was supposed to own everything collectively but nobody dared to claim a piece for himself/herself. Nobody could touch the wealth; it was not really theirs to be had. Only the communist elites could enrich themselves at the trough of the communist utopia. The proletariat just got the crumbs if they behaved according to the Communist Party Five Year Plans.
The Economic Police made sure that nobody got ahead of anybody else. Agents, aided by paid informants, made frequent raids in people’s homes to inquire where they got better food, better clothes, or better furniture than anybody else had.
The lifestyles of the rich and famous were a good description of how the dictator, his family, his lackeys, and the Communist Party members lived while the masses seethed in despair. Rebellion was out of the question, guns were confiscated early, and suppression would have been swift and brutal.
Hollande promises to spend lavishly on social programs and new government jobs, more than the 28 percent of GDP that France currently spends on welfare. His subjects will be well fed, expected to deliver a minimum of effort, and a lousy work ethic. After all, in the socialist mind, everything is a right and must be provided by the state free. It is a form of slavery to the government, like a well-behaved and devoted dog who expects nothing else but his daily rations of food and shelter.
**Written By Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh***
What you say? That is Europe and can never happen here? The Communist Party USA has been in existence since around 1912. They have worked and have tried to undermine America’s Republic since its inception. No thanks to the like of Woodrow Wilson or Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the velvet handed Jimmy Carter, America still is a capitalist society where entrepreneurs and businessmen can develop and grow their dreams and aspirations.
JOBS come from businesses that garner a profit; not one that is run by government entities.
Have any of you lemmings realized yet that Hollywood actors/actresses advocate Socialism/Marxism? If you think the majority of them don’t advocate such; why haven’t the uber left gone after the likes of Sean Penn (Che and Castro lover), Matt Damon, Will Smith, Jane Fonda, Barbara Streisand,etc.?
Will Smith recently advocated Socialism until he had a rude awakening of possible taxation of his wealth while in France.
SEE WILL SMITH‘S SHOCKED REACTION TO FRANCE’S PROPOSED 75% TAX RATE…AFTER JUSTADVOCATING FOR HIGHER TAXES IN U.S.
By Becket Adams
May 15, 2012
Remember when actor and comedian Jon Lovitz went off on President Barack Obama’s taxation policies? We’re sure you do. Shortly after Lovitz’ now-famous “bulls**t” rant went viral, Zombie, a blogger writing for PJ Media, posited the following theory: left-leaning celebrities are comfortable with taxation and “fair share” rhetoric — but only to certain a point.
Named after the famous “Laffer Curve,” Zombie calls it the “Lovitz Curve.”
And now Will Smith, a strong supporter of President Obama‘s call for higher taxes on the country’s top earners, may have found his “Lovitz Curve.”
[Author’s note: although it’s difficult to understand what Smith is saying because of all the crosstalk and the translation, his reaction at the 1:20 mark is unmistakable]:
Trouble viewing video? Click Here.
“The Hollywood megastar enthusiastically preached the gospel of paying one’s fair share of taxes in a French television interview this weekend,” Business Insider’s Alex Biles reports.
“But when asked about his take on the tax policy of French president-elect François Hollande, Smith’s was shocked silly by the suggestion of a 75 percent tax rate on those earning above €1 million annually,” he adds.
As mentioned in the above, Smith isn’t uncomfortable with President Obama’s call for higher taxes.
“I’m very supportive of that idea,” Smith told The Associated Press in an interview. “America has been fantastic to me. I have no problem paying whatever I need to pay to keep my country growing.”
However, as posited in the “Lovitz Curve,” everyone has their breaking point. Apparently, Will Smith’s is Francois Hollande’s proposed 75 percent tax rate.
In Romania under Communist rule:
During the terror reign of Nicolae Ceausescu, they pillaged and confiscated private property from all citizens but particularly the wealth of those who owned multiple homes, land, paintings, gold coins, cars, and jewelry.
Many communists had huge bank accounts in Switzerland and lived like kings while the population starved, fearing for their lives daily, and lucky to be alive. Shortly after Ceausescu and his wife Elena were executed on Christmas 1989, several billion dollars worth of financial aid earmarked for economic development in Romania, disappeared without a trace.
Are these examples of some that live like KINGS while their minions suffer without jobs and some even living in fear?
Mob Action, Intimidation and Thuggery the Al Capone Way? Are Union MEMBERS Pawns and Communists by Proxy? Example…..Wisconsin.
For those advocating Socialism and DON’T BELIEVE it leads to Communism; take the words of the dear leader Sam Webb, the party Chair of the Communist Party USA:
Did YOU notice that after Will Smith had the reaction to 75% taxation and a second or two of thought, his statement was “Well God Bless America”? Is this an entitlement to the statement “Good enough for thee but not for me”?
“None of this is to suggest that the Democrats aren’t now or won’t be in the future an obstacle to progressive change; in too many instances they are, but they aren’t the main obstacle for the moment.”