France Demands Skype Register As a Telco 209
jfruh writes "Skype made a name for itself by largely bypassing the infrastucture — and the costs, and the regulations — of the legacy telecommunications industry. But now the French telecom regulator wants to change that, at least in France. At issue is not the service's VoIP offering, but rather the Skype Out service that allows users to dial phones on traditional networks. Regulators say that this service necessitates that Skype face the same regulations as other telecoms."
As anal as France is.... (Score:4, Interesting)
While France has many many funny laws and ideas, many of which I think are bogus. But on this one IMO they are right. If Skype connected directly at the user to a telephone then IMO it would be a different picture. However, SKYPE acts on behalf of the user and hence they are doing the same thing as a telco, albeit not a completely telco.
Re:As anal as France is.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Except that Skype facilitates incoming calls only, so they are more like a foreign telco than a local one. And because they don't provide POTS to consumers, it is impossible to fulfill France's telco requirements to be able to identifiy the location of an emergency call. At best, France's laws are out of step with the 21st century. Or else, no Skype is like a foreign telco, routing incoming calls, and not a local telco, which provides outgoing calls.
Re:As anal as France is.... (Score:5, Informative)
IP Telephony providers have had very little problem complying with this archaic regulation.
The clincher is that it's just as difficult to tell where a call originates when it's on a mobile network. You can, at best, tell what tower it is on. Not much use on a block with a high-rise apartment building.
With IP, the theory goes:
1. If the call originates from an IP Address that is fixed (eg. DSL) in location, give that location.
2. If it's not, but you know the address of the IP, give that location
3. Otherwise, give the billing address of the customer's service.
The problem in Australia is that the database isn't at all dynamic. You put the address in and in a few days it's available to emergency services - so, when someone calls from a mobile phone (that's not on the telstra network) or an IP Phone, emergency services get the billing address.
IMHO - If Skypeout is achieved by making international calls into France, then France can go jump. But if they've got a carrier interface (SS7 gateways and the like) inside the country's borders then they can put up with the same laws that the other Telco's in France (ie. their local competition) do.
Really? (Score:2)
I'm no expert on the ins and outs of IP assignment, but with dynamic assignment of IPs, it seems to me that even giving a billing address is extremely problematic. In Australia, the IP address could be owned by Telstra, dynamically assigned to your iphone, would could be anywhere in the country. Perhaps days and weeks after the fact you could look at logs and find out some better information, but I would have thought that in real time, IP address tells you precisely zero.
Re: (Score:2)
How is Skype Out not facilitating outgoing calls?
Re: (Score:3)
I've always seen the legitimizing factor in telecom regulation as being that they consume a finite public resource, either in the form of right-of-ways for wiring or spectrum for wireless operations. In exchange for exclusive access to the resources and, correspondingly, a monopoly (or oligopoly) on the service, limits are placed on rates and otherwise economically inviable services are mandated (such as rural access). In the case of Skype, while they certainly threaten telephone monopolies which rely on
Re: (Score:3)
I see you didn't bother to read the article summary. When Skype connects users to *actual land-line phones,* they are using the same limited publicly-subsidized infrastructure as every other telco. This is the rationale for regulation, not Skype's internet-only telephony practices.
Re: (Score:2)
Skype may be connecting to the telephone network, but I don't see anywhere that they're building out infrastructure through right-of-ways. If they are liable for regulation in that way, then Slingbox should be regulated as a cable provider. They do exactly what Skype does, just unidirectionally: make a cable television endpoint, interconnected to a physical network that exists in regulated right-of-ways available via the Internet.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're using built-out infrastructure (as Skype is), then you should be regulated the same as all other users, whether you originally built it out or not. Otherwise, should every other telco be allowed to create an "independent" shell company to build out the infrastructure, then use it themselves regulation free? Whether/how to regulate other services like Slingbox is a separate issue --- maybe they should be, too (I don't know much about their particular service).
Re: (Score:2)
But another telco is providing that connection to the actual land line phones, so Skype are not occupying a public resource. Is it reasonable for Skype to be required to implement 999 (or whatever it is in France, but that would be like 911 in the US) calls from within Skype on a PC? And, is it reasonable for Skype to be required to provide the location of your PC, or your mobile phone, or your ipad, to the authorities when you make such a call? How is Skype going to know where my PC is? How is Skype going
Re: (Score:2)
>How is Skype going to know where my PC is?
1. License a rootkit from Sony
2. ??
3. Don't profit!
Re:As anal as France is.... (Score:4, Insightful)
No, the justification is that telephony is a vital service in the modern world. You need it just to live, otherwise basic stuff like getting a job or dealing with your government is near impossible.
In exchange for being allowed to provide a vital service everyone needs and which is thus a somewhat captive market you have to meet some basic requirements.
Re:As anal as France is.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Except that they never actually had to install any physical telecommunications equipment. They provide an overlay network. It is a network that uses the existing phone and internet networks to provide functionality. They take advantage of the fact that communication over a phone handset is fundamentally no different than sending bits over the internet. An actual telecom company provides access to some public resource that they were granted stewardship over by a government (e.g. phone lines, fiber cables, wireless spectrum, etc). In some cases they actually own those resources. This just seems like another case of a European government trying to shakedown a rich company for money, (e.g. Microsoft, etc).
If I was skype I would just turn off access to France and let the people fire their politicians then turn it back on.
It won't be long before Europe declares wikipedia and youtube public utilities and start trying to extort money from them too
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Let me just state for the record. If France is on one side of an issue ...
There is about a 92.6% chance I am on the other.
And a 100% chance you can walk around the end of the issue and get behind them.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Dude, there's a lot of Americans and most of them are great.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:As anal as France is.... (Score:4, Funny)
Absolutely - but I suspect this is in the 8%. And their cheese isn't bad either.
They make good fries and toast! While many slashdotters have not tried it, their kiss ain't too shabby either.
Re: (Score:3)
Would that include all those ideas like Republicanism, liberalism, liberty, freedom, free trade, private property, free speech and such which the American founding fathers (particularly Franklin) actually learned FROM the French ?
Would it include the independence of America from Britain (without a fortune in French funding the American revolution could never have succeeded).
Oh I know, you must have a problem with them thinking that going to war for no other reason than to make your cronies rich is unwise ?
I
Re: (Score:3)
The internet was turned loose to the world for a free exchange of information to improve and enhance the species and our lives.
I am not sure if that is the case. It is best to study a timeline such as here [webopedia.com], however the most interesting thing about the Internet is that it grew before Governments could put controls on it. Even today Governments are still playing catch-up, however in democratic countries it is almost political suicide for any government to put legislation in place for tighter control of the Internet although that does not stop some politicians (you know the "Holier than thou" or "think of the Children" types) from t
Re: (Score:2)
Way back when, BBS networks would sometimes let their modems be used by people to dial out locally. It's sickening that some government thugs are trying to ladle massive regulatory burden on such.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes and it's ridiculous at an elementary school level. Have the French not figured out how to end the call by hanging up and then phone emergency services, exactly like regular POTS? The same applies for E.S. to break into a phone call forcing a disconnect and then call back.
It's all about money, greed and stupidity.
Did YOU read the summary and still not GET IT?
Replace the French with Ethiopians, who could use an upgrade.
Re: (Score:2)
Reading the summaries/articles are for newbies, I use ESP. Look how far it's gotten me!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
France should turn itself over to England, who seem to be sensible and close enough to babysit these silly pricks.
The UK? That dead-end backwater. The place that is so sensible that it's planning to institute a tax on poor people who have "too many bedrooms"?
French GDP/Capita 44,007 USD
UK GDP/Capita 38,811 USD
What has the UK done since 1945?
UK electricity ~ 20% nuclear
France ~ 80% nuclear
UK high speed rail lines: 1 (which goes to France)
France: around 6
UK space effort - launched one 66Kg satellite in 1971
France - Arianespace
UK exports (2011) $479,200,000,000 (10th in world)
France: $589,700,000,000 (5th in world)
Curre
Re:As anal as France is.... (Score:4, Funny)
"What has the UK done since 1945?"
Well, their contribution to rock & roll , entertaining dialects, beer and drama still trump anything France has done in that time period.
"UK electricity ~ 20% nuclear
France ~ 80% nuclear"
France generates more Nuclear waste? England generates more wind power. Was there a discernible point?
"UK space effort - launched one 66Kg satellite in 1971
France - Arianespace"
I attend many lavish fireworks displays, but I don't feel obliged to pay for one. So France throws its money around on a space program that could be covered by others.
"UK exports (2011) $479,200,000,000 (10th in world)
France: $589,700,000,000 (5th in world)"
The U.K. seems to specialize in administration, let them administer Frances output for a higher yield. Good point.
"UK (#2 after USA) 162.973 billion USD
France (#4) 117.676 billion USD"
I believe a business deal could be struck where France is leased to China to pay off the U.K. debt.
Re: (Score:2)
"What has the UK done since 1945?"
Well, their contribution to rock & roll , entertaining dialects, beer and drama still trump anything France has done in that time period
Come, on Johny Haliday and 1664 beer are much better than anything the UK has been able to produce.
"UK electricity ~ 20% nuclear
France ~ 80% nuclear"
France generates more Nuclear waste? England generates more wind power. Was there a discernible point?
The UK generates more CO2. (And lets it's nuclear waste leak all over the show instead of reprocessing it).
"UK space effort - launched one 66Kg satellite in 1971
France - Arianespace"
I attend many lavish fireworks displays, but I don't feel obliged to pay for one. So France throws its money around on a space program that could be covered by others.
Arianespace (sometimes) makes a profit.
The U.K. seems to specialize in administration, let them administer Frances output for a higher yield. Good point.
Ok, you've trumped me. That's the best joke I've heard all week.
Re: (Score:3)
Johny Haliday and 1664 beer are much better than anything the UK has been able to produce.
Now you are just being a silly person. Johny Haliday is not exactly the Beatles and 1664 is just another moderately good lager. Go away before I taunt you.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm making a knee-to-the-nuts reaction to France(not the people, the government) and any other morons who try to attach charges to emerging technologies in order to sustain their old tech(which I didn't miss, did you?). Kind of like buggywhip manufacturers whining for a tax on automobiles.
No, screw them. Phones are bad,clunky and OLD! Their business model is tired. The phone companies should be regulated till their stockholders give up, then be absorbed by newer technologies with better ideas. If this is th
Re: (Score:2)
the Us's firsts and oldest ally, btw.
If only the English language between the USA's first and oldest ally.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that hardly answers what business the state, or anybody else has in regulating communication protocols, aside from protecting against interference.
The "state" is just the expression of the will of the people. They want communications regulated to avoid things like big multinationals swamping the airwaves according to how they see fit, rather than for the good of the majority.
Technological artifacts like "communication protocols" are not sentient creatures with individual rights, they are tools to be used as the people see fit.
I am all for it. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Skype out must be the most expensive VoIP provider out there. Plus it is non-standard, proprietary and closed source.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I am all for it. (Score:5, Informative)
You are right - I just checked mine (CallCentric), and their rate is 0.0198 USD to France, while Skype is 0.023 USD.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I think you missed the point - Skype is more expensive despite avoiding the French regulations. Skype is not "just" a VOIP service, so on some level this probably makes sense. But it was still surprising to me.
I agree that telecommunications are amazingly cheap these days, though lately I've been finding out that I've been overpaying a large amount by not taking advantage of VOIP and prepaid wireless.
Re: (Score:3)
Yup. Even if you made 1 call a month my VoIP provider still beats Skype.
I had a call yesterday over Skype and I found the quality absolutely awful compared to my VoIP line as well.
Correct (Score:5, Insightful)
And they are correct. You tie into the Telco, you need to play by the regulations for Telco.
Re: (Score:2)
But then isn't the answer to simply avoid a physical presence in France? Surely they can still offer competitive rates while hooking into POTS in one of the other EU states? I'm asking this because I'm totally ignorant of European telecom laws.
Re: (Score:3)
As am I; however most telco system have regulatory requirements, so it's reasonable that anyone using the phone system would also need to have the regulations. This is specifically about that features in Skype, not calls that are strictly voip.
I would suspect any Telco would do the same.
Re: (Score:3)
You give yourself a physical presence in local markets because it IS cheaper than routing over an incumbent toll carrier. Take out your hardware, and the skype out feature would cost substantially more for the feature (which is why they have hardware there to begin with). As long as France's standards apply across all competitors, then I see no problem with this.
Re: (Score:3)
As long as France's standards apply across all competitors, then I see no problem with this.
I see no problem with it, so long as the original reason for the regulation still applies. In other words, what would be the consequences if Skype (or other VOIP services) were to NOT follow the regulations?
Re: (Score:2)
I think that overlooks the fact that the telcos would carry the burden for anyone using the services. That said:
You loose the loss of automated emergency services.
Remember this isn't about Skype, it's about Skype out.
Re: (Score:2)
I should add that I don't really care what policies the people of France have - if they want to over-regulate, so be it. I'm in the US, and I'd be pretty sore if they made my cheap-ass computer-based VOIP thingy support 911... who would call 911 on that, anyway? On the other hand, I'm one of those weirdo responsible people who actually springs for the extra $1.50/month on my VOIP service for 911...
Re: Short sighted not to regulate (Score:5, Insightful)
French telecommunication regulator is right to try to impose operator burdends on Skype.
1/ More and more people are adopting this service a primary phone service because of SkypeIn and SkypeOut feature. This means that there will be more and more case where user will need to make emergency calls. This lack of emergency call support is a shame. So the post above is ... very shortsighted. One day you may need it yourseff.
2/ VOIP Technology / Skype are more and more displacing regular phones. They play the same role so they need somehow to be regulated in the same manner. There is in France a declarative licence for small telcos, the so called "L33-1". I know a couple of medium sized company operating VoIP service that applied to this without any problem. So it is not like it is unbearable for companies like Microsoft.
3/ I am so amazed by comment like: Skype should cut skype in/out, or avoid physical presence in France (replace by country xxx if you want) to avoid any form of regulation.
Damn ! these regulations are non discriminatory and made for the common good. Its like on the road, if you have no rules, you end up with a dysfunctional traffic. I see in all these comment some kind of selfish, short sighted spirit, 'I want the lowest cost regardless the consequences" that is a worrying trend.
Just because someone sees the work "governement", "regulation" they jump to the roof, say its bad, andy freedom and they try to avoid it without even pondering the consequences or the actual need for regulation. I see this ultimately as some kind of subtul selfishness.
As much as I agree that freedom and freedom to innovate should be preserved and fostered, it should not be a the cost of forgetting the notion of common good.
Re: (Score:2)
As much as I agree that freedom and freedom to innovate should be preserved and fostered, it should not be a the cost of forgetting the notion of common good.
As a person paying $1.50/month for 911 service through my VOIP provider, I guess my main hangup is personal responsibility. I think it's great when the government steps in to correct chaos for the common good: regulate telephone poles and utilities, roads, the airwaves and other common property. I'm not as into "do this, it's for your own good". If some jackass wants to save a few pennies by skimping on 911 service, let 'em. The only reason I will acquiesce and admit that it's probably a good idea is that j
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
And they are correct. You tie into the Telco, you need to play by the regulations for Telco.
Why? Skype isn't providing traditional telephones, they are using gateways that interface with the Telco network (thus are ultimately controlled by the Telcos) -- the Telco is providing the physical telephone lines, not Skype.
If a computer-to-computer call is not regulated, why should the computer end of a computer-to-landline call be regulated? The landline side is already regulated, what makes the computer side different just because it's able to call a landline?
Re:Correct (Score:4, Informative)
Because both ends of the landline call need to be regulated. It has nothing to do with the computer aspect of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Because both ends of the landline call need to be regulated. It has nothing to do with the computer aspect of it.
And aren't all you guys cheering on regulation the same people who would cry murder if they were trying to regulate the Internet?
Re:Correct (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because both ends of the landline call need to be regulated. It has nothing to do with the computer aspect of it.
Oh, "Just because". Well that's a great reason for government regulation.
Re:Correct (Score:5, Informative)
Skype in this case is taking the place of an inter-exchange carrier as described generally in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interexchange_carrier [wikipedia.org]
In the US, these entities are in fact regulated, and I imagine its the same in France. If they're acting in the same fashion (but with slightly different physical characteristics), why wouldn't those same laws apply to them? If you want fully de-regulate the long distance phone providers as being telecommunications entities that's one thing, but applying one set of rules because its half tethered off the internet doesn't change the nature of what these companies do.
Re: (Score:3)
Skype in this case is taking the place of an inter-exchange carrier as described generally in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interexchange_carrier [wikipedia.org]
In the US, these entities are in fact regulated, and I imagine its the same in France. If they're acting in the same fashion (but with slightly different physical characteristics), why wouldn't those same laws apply to them? If you want fully de-regulate the long distance phone providers as being telecommunications entities that's one thing, but applying one set of rules because its half tethered off the internet doesn't change the nature of what these companies do.
I don't see it. From the article "An IXC carries traffic, usually voice traffic, between telephone exchanges." Skype isn't carrying traffic between exchanges, instead they are acting as a long wire from the point of entry to the Telco network to the end user's computer. The management of a large building may provide a long wire from the building MPOE to an office on the 55th floor, but that doesn't make them an IXC.
I think Skype is more like a CLEC (with a very large "local area"), but they aren't that eith
Re: (Score:2)
So they finally cannot tap into the conversations anymore?
Wow.
Now, if only they can force Facebook and Google into becoming official telcos. I mean, what is the difference between sending a text message on a phone to a bunch of friends, and sharing something with a restricted group of friends on Facebook?
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing, but it in no way applies.
Let me know when text messaging as the regulation for emergency services to know who is calling immediately.
Where does Skype connect to France's phone system? (Score:2, Insightful)
If Skype has VOIP-to-POTS gateways physically located in France, they need to follow France's legacy telecom rules. If the gateways are located elsewhere (e.g. in another EU country), France shouldn't have any standing to impose their regulations on them.
Call Termination (Score:4, Informative)
France can always prevent call termination on France's POTs numbers.
Re: (Score:2)
The two claimed purposes are emergency calls and wire tapping. The first is quite difficult because unlike landlines or cell towers, it's genuinely not possible to know with certainty where the caller is, and so how do you route the emergency call to the 'nearest' location?
In the U.S. the FCC finally agreed that sending customer provided location info to the call center was adequate but prior to that, the incumbents did become more interested in public safety than they had ever been before or since. I don't
Possible response (Score:4, Interesting)
I live in France, and see no need for this... (Score:4, Informative)
OK, they brought us the Minitel. Er, thanks...
I've been here for more than 20 years, and have really enjoyed being financially fucked in the ass by the France Telecom monopoly, swiftly followed by the FT/SFR duopoly, and then Bouygues came along and, tada!, we had the same old...overpriced, underserviced.
Fortunately, after years off battling the well-captured 'regulators', Free has finally got things moving somewhat in the right direction.
My point? Skype buys its out calling service from these fine, regulated companies. It is not a telco in the traditional sense, so leave it alone.
Btw, not a Skype/MS shill, although I freely admit i have found it incredibly useful over the years, and it has saved me and my family a ton of money. Right now moving to Jitsi...it's getting there. (Waiting for Android and iOs clients, please)
Re:I live in France, and see no need for this... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
It's nice to know that even people living in France can't fucking read the article.
Obvious Course of Action (Score:2)
The obvious course of action for Skype is, if the French government considers imposing regulations on Skype, to deny service to France. The French government is not powerful enough to put Skype in a disadvantageous position; all Skype has to do is pack up its bags and leave, and then France will be denied the revenue it was after and will also have to deal with a bunch of angry constituents.
plus ca change ... (Score:2)
Tax grab (Score:2)
Skype Demands (Score:2)
Seriously, Russian government abandoned a similar idea after this video - "Hitler and Skype" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxhs8jMnC7w [youtube.com] , which was watched at Youtube millions of times.
Hitler speaks in Russian, which just made sound as German language. The funny part is that Hitler uses a lot of F-words regarding proposed ban on Skype, but the caption translates it into correct cultured Russian language.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why Silicon Valley did not happen in France (Score:4, Insightful)
And be replaced by what? The closed-source, proprietary protocol Skype?
Imagine that POTS is shut down and all that is left is a bunch of proprietary VOIP services, none of which interoperate with each other. Yeah, that's really a step forward!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Many VOIP systems are based on open standards and do intropolate well with other standards. My VOIP provider provides a gateway to/from Skype, to/from Google Talk, and to/from POTS. I can get DID numbers in many countries. I can get trunk lines to POTS, or simply stay in the SIP to SIP market. There are so many SIP providers, SIP Broker has evolved to keep track of all their gateways. Have a friend on VIATALK, you can call him with POTS, or call by SIP with the gateway.
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
"Regulations designed to protect the incumbent status quo,"
false.. and delusional..AND ignorant, bordering on stupid.
" France out of the picture for innovation. "
Are you high? Or do you really think silicon valley is the only type of innovation there is?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Ah, France. You’re so dynamic and quick to embrace change From the Toubon Law [culture.gouv.fr] to propping up Minitel [wsj.com] to the stoic way you embraced labor regulations aimed at easing ridiculously high unemployment by making the first two years of employment somewhat more flexible with your non à la précarité [pbs.org] movement... (Does make for decent wine, though, and likely will for centuries [memory-alpha.org].)
Why Skype did not happen in Silicon Valley (Score:2)
Regulations designed to protect the incumbent status quo, rather than serving the needs of real users, is the kind of thing that has kept USA out of the picture for telecommunications innovation. USA must import their telecommunications innovation.
Re: (Score:3)
the interest isn't sudden. It started as soon as skype started selling this feature in France.
Re:Why Silicon Valley did not happen in France (Score:5, Interesting)
This comment coming from the land of the porkbarrel project is pathetically laughable...
Re: (Score:3)
"I strongly suspect that in reality France Telecom complained about how Skype is sending calls "for free over our domestic network and costing us money" and this is the real reason for the sudden regulatory interest."
Actually no, there is a global push for this.
It's in large part because of all the spam and scam calls that literally millions of people in the West are plagued by from countries like India and is part of a bigger push in general. Globally there are attempts at the ITU to try and get Caller ID
Re:Why Silicon Valley did not happen in France (Score:5, Interesting)
Seems to me that France should really be embracing open source with open arms -- I bet the only thing holding them back is that so much open source material has already been created by dirty English speakers ;)
The entire French police force is slowly but surely switching to Linux and more generally Open Source software, as are all public schools (although Microsoft did and still does try its usually dirty tricks to prevent that). The entire national assembly (main house of parliament) entirely runs on Linux, from Desktop machines for the députés to servers hosting the live feed/on demand videos. Open Source projects (originating from companies as well as universities and such) regularly obtain grants/funds from official bodies (and in fact, creating an Open Source project is a very favorable point to obtain a lot of those innovation funds). Strong recommendations have been emitted to use only open and standard file formats in all administration, and several projects for laws have been proposed to enforce this, as well as the use of Open Source software in all public administration (not sure any of those were actually passed, though). Skype is also officially forbidden in high-level universities and official research organizations, essentially because it is closed source and thus theoretically prone to potential spying/security issues.
Seems to me that France is *already* embracing Open Source with open arms.
Re: (Score:3)
Skype is also officially forbidden in high-level universities and official research organizations, essentially because it is closed source and thus theoretically prone to potential spying/security issues.
Actually, it's because those organizations tend to have extremely restrictive firewalls and Skype doesn't sit nicely with them. This makes collaborating with people in those organizations on joint research projects rather awkward (though the usual way of dealing with it is to ignore the French, the same as the English have done for centuries).
Re:Then Leave (Score:5, Interesting)
"France taxes the crap out of its citizens so we should have seen this coming."
which has nothing to do with this issue.
But hay, just jump on your ignorant bandwagon and toot the crazy horn.
France's person income tax is 0% to 75%..not just 75%. and with Bouclier Fiscal I don't think very many people, if any, pay 75% since it needs to be 1.2million pr more with 2 adults. Not only to the France have a different word for everything, they also have a different tax system.
Perspective:
If you were a family of 2 adults and 3 children making 100,000 Euros you tax rate would be 14%
France taxes, in the real world, are on par, and sometime less then the US taxes..and they have more services.
And of cours,e saying ;'high taxes' is pretty meaningless.
What are the service you get? whats the VALUE overall
Re: (Score:2)
I won't comment on value, but rather just inject some harder numbers into this debate:
OECD National Accounts at a Glance, 2012
http://knoema.com/OECDNA2012 [knoema.com]
France taxes at a rate of (roughly) 51% of GDP and spends at 56%
The USA taxes at 32% and spends at 42% (2010 accounts)
UK: taxes at 40% and spends at 49%
Germany: taxes at 44% and spends at 45%
Korea: taxes at 31% and spends at 30%
France is something of a world-leader when it comes to both taxing and spending, especially least among developed nations. The US
Re: (Score:3)
Because "French taxes are high" is oft-repeated, irritating, mostly-wrong, truthiness.
Is the French taxation regime inefficient? yes, but mostly because a lot of the redistribution it is meant to produce is in the form of market-distorting goods and services instead of cash. Also, capital gains are, like everywhere else, insufficiently taxed.
But the level of taxation is pretty much the European average. Higher than the US? Yes. Better value for money? Probably.
Re:Then Leave (Score:5, Insightful)
France doesn'r relly have high taxes.
I am defensive for several reasons:
1) the word taxes has become a knee jerk scare word. Being further seperated form services. Meaning peopel talk about cutting taxes, and everyone loves it. A politician saying that the result is loosing servcies, and everyone villifys them.
2) IT's about value.
3) France is the US's first and oldest ally. The US would not exist without France. The general anti-france meme in the US is short sight, unfair, and based in complete ignorance.
Then when people say ignorant shit like "France taxes the crap out of its citizens so we should have seen this coming."
it just general irritates me. It is used to scare people. "You don't want to be like France, there healthcare means that are taxed really high!"
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. Each time the so called libertarians come out with their spiel, I am reminded of the quote "In a democracy your vote counts, in feudalism your count votes."
Essentially they want the world to go back to an era when the rich and endowed had all the power and the poor could go get fucked.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
France's income tax is indeed usually lower than in the US, but that's not the whole picture.
You also have to look at sales tax (VAT), which is much higher in France at 19.6% vs around 7-8% in most US states.
Then there is the taxe d'habitation, which simply doesn't exist in the U.S. for renters.
All in all, you wind up paying more in France. The value, however, is much better in France, given all the various services and aid which are provided.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Right, so Microsoft should embargo France.....wait ... that would be a Bad Thing? Perhaps they should carpet bomb Paris with free Windows 8 DVD's ... that would teach the French government to toy with Microsoft and it's minions....
Re: (Score:2)
As I've said before...when a country tries to extort money from a company that company should threaten to cease operations within that country so call their bluff...if they are not bluffing then the company just ceases to operate.
So national elected governments should cow to profit driven corporations. Fucking brilliant plan.
Re: (Score:2)
Leave and Lose Big! (Score:2)
There's always someone with this silly logic on Slashdot! The world doesn't revolve around the company in question, it's the other way around!
Each time Microsoft or Google have been involved in some sort of legal issue in Europe - some guy like you pops up to tell them to "just" leave Europe. The problem is that Europe represents more than 50% of the profits for compan
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Music therapy.
You both need it to take care of your issue and to learn about gov't regulations introduced now to stop competition and keep prices up, prevent (lower income) people from making income in that field. [ij.org]
But ifÂSB 1437Âpasses, anyone who wants to become a music therapist will face some onerous barriers: an applicant would need a bachelorâ(TM)s degree in music therapy from a program approved by the American Music Therapy Association (AMTA), at least 1,200 hours of clinical training, and 900 hours of internship experience. Practicing or calling oneself a music therapist without a government permission slip would be criminalized, with violators facing up to aÂ$500 fine and/or 30 days imprisonment.
That's what gov't regulations are all about, that and taking ppl for their money. Providing an innovating service ppl like? Ha, we are gov't, it would really be sad if you didn't pay up and something bad happened to your business.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
What is the purpose of regulating telcos, and is that purpose still relevant to the proper operation of telcos and in providing fair and equal services to the citizens?
At least in the USA (which I am the most familiar), the purpose of regulating telcos is primarily twofold
1. To provide "tariff-like" access and pricing (both for customers and inter-teleco, intended to promote competition)
2. To provide for the USF (universal service fund).
Of course, there are some other requirements: emergency 911, wiretap, etc...
At least in the US, Skype is not subject to these rules. although it is widely believed that skype can be "wiretap"-ed (well, not literally). Other than taxes, th
Re: (Score:2)
The geese left in disgust.
It's France: the geese didn't leave they were eaten.
Re:Yeah so they can tax the company to feed the go (Score:5, Insightful)
Yet, strangely, people aren't dying in the streets from starvation and lack of tyres in France. If the "socialist minded French way" means a reasonably functional country, with happy people enjoying a decently high standard of living while working 3-hour days, why the f*** would I take advice from someone who lives in a country where typical workers grind through 40-hour workweeks (if they are lucky not to need 80 at minimum wage) and still have sucky lives?
Re: (Score:3)
In other words, they're too inefficient and can't handle the competition, so they make up a stupid excuse that the right wing loonies at home will eat up.
In case you hadn't noticed, one of Europe's biggest tire makers has obviously no problems with French labour culture, so it is fairly obvious that it is Titan that has a problem, not France.