The right to vote for those who work or do business, the right to vote for those who pay taxes. Higher income groups for higher income groups. You can't earn legally for an expensive car and a house, you can only steal it. And other nonsense from communist-stricken Czech society - it's about creating elites, whether it's creating elites of the working class or creating elites from poor people. Elitism - a new Czech threat (tired too soon) democracy?
They want to pay out their 13th pensions from CEZ's profits at a time when pensioners are in the safest situation (low inflation and a certain state pension). Contributions for low-income or progressive taxation - the CSSD is indeed a typical "Czech" party, as it is a party that builds its program on creating elites. Favored groups - in other words, offers society equal consumption. That is, everyone will be able to buy anything, which is simply nice, but undemocratic. The CSSD could therefore be described as an undemocratic party.
Unfortunately, this ailment - that is, elitism - affects most of the "democratic" world today. Democracy is going through today crisis of morality and intellect.
What is a "crisis of morality and intellect (s)"?
Everyone wants everything today, but few want to do anything about it. This has been used by some political groups in recent years, and it is precisely because of the lack of intellectual elites that they have been able to build a very successful political career on it. They simply promised everything to everyone. They live from human envy:
If you want something that your richer neighbor has, but you don't have IT for, then we will take enough money from the neighbor, which we will then give you so that you have IT too!
And many people began to believe that. Without thinking about the consequences, because there was no one to tell them that he was on this approach something wrong. This is the lack of morality and intellect (and intellectual elites). A just and democratic society is not a society of equal consumption, but a society of equal opportunities. Everyone should be able to achieve something, to be better than average - to live above average. Above all, however, must be the above-average effort.
But let's go back to those 13th pensions of the CSSD. With this proposal, the CSSD is beginning to create a kind of elite for retirees here, as people who are incredibly bad at it and what the great poor are like. I do not deny that this is often the case, I do not deny that the life situation of many pensioners is bad. However, at a time when retirees have the most secure income from society as a whole, it is selfish, unfair and, above all, undemocratic to improve the standard of living of retirees at the expense of society as a whole. Maybe it seems immoral to you, maybe it seems bad to you.
But what is the morale in a country where that "stupid" pub majority lives in the minds of communism? Where, even 20 years after the fall of the totalitarian rule of the Communists, who decimated this country, is this party the 3rd strongest in the Chamber of Deputies of the Parliament?
One opinion emerged in one of the internet discussions:
Only people who can prove that they are currently working legally or that they are currently entrepreneurs and that they have worked in the Czech Republic for more than 30 years should have the right to vote.
Sounds nice, doesn't it? You know, I may be an idealist, but in my opinion, our general goal should be to achieve a democratic and liberal society with uncorrupted morals.
And how does the above-mentioned opinion on the right to vote fit into this concept? Just that nothing. And I'll ask - doesn't it remind you of something? Maybe - communism? However, the elite of the workers is replaced by the elite of those who pay taxes. But isn't it the same otherwise?
We may not like it, it may seem unfair to us, but even those who abuse the social system and do not work have the right to vote and their voice has the same power as that of a working person. We need to realize one pretty basic thing - bad society will not improve by changing the system. This society has created an abusive social system. That someone is abusing it is only a logical consequence - if there is a possibility, why not? And that it's immoral? But please, after all, a kind of dubious morality is drawn here only in cases where it suits people. Otherwise, our society is simply immoral.
On the other hand, why should someone who earns more pay even higher taxes? This, in turn, is the elitism of low-income groups. And that this is a sign of solidarity between the rich and the poor? However, everyone should have the opportunity to become rich today. If there are any obstacles, instead of setting crutches such as progressive taxation (which tells people - don't earn, don't try, the state will take your money anyway), those obstacles should be addressed and removed. It's much more useful.
A lazy person will remain lazy (unless he swayed himself somehow), just like a man without effort. It's just a fact.
And where is socialism? A person with a salary of 100 gross will pay 000 in taxes today (“super-gross” salary 20 + 100% tax on “super-gross” salary). A person with a salary of 134 gross taxes on taxes (and contributions to the social and health care system) will pay 000. A person with the higher salary will therefore pay for 18 000 - more. However, I do not take into account possible tax rebates and bonuses - it could also happen that the one with a income of tens of thousands will not pay any taxes. Unlike the richer one.
That's pretty social and solidary, don't you think?