Swiss voters on Sunday decisively rejected a call to require women to do national service in the military, civil protection teams or other forms, as all men must do already.

Official results. with counting still ongoing in some areas after a referendum, showed that more than half of Switzerland’s cantons, or states, had rejected the “citizen service initiative” by wide margins. That meant it was defeated, because proposals need a majority of both voters and cantons to pass.

Voters also heavily rejected a separate proposal to impose a new national tax on individual donations or inheritances of more than 50 million francs ($62 million), with the revenues to be used to fight the impact of climate change and help Switzerland meet its ambitions to have net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

    • Pacattack57@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      Because it is theft. If my parents are successful and pay their taxes why is it fair to double tax a child’s inheritance. You tax earnings and income. You don’t the same money multiple times.

          • Guy Ingonito@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            Over 60 Million dollars is a lot of money. More money than your kid needs to live comfortably and never have to work ever again. That’s so much money you are creating a family that never has to experience the life of a normal person and can use that money to influence politics to compound that effect.

            How much money does a person need to live comfortably without having to contribute labor? 2-5 million? Is living in luxury but not so much that someone who’s never had a real job can just buy elections unfair?

            • Pacattack57@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              You are presenting issues that are irrelevant to the tax. Yes those things you mentioned are unfair and should be regulated accordingly. Those are irrelevant to an inheritance tax. If you want to create a wealth tax over a certain amount that’s fine but call a spade a spade. Don’t hide it as inheritance tax and allow wealthy people to hide their money in other ways like trusts and businesses.

      • innermachine@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days ago

        Thing is the same money does regularly get taxed multiple times. You get shafted on money as it comes to you (income tax) and u get shafted on that money once you spend it to (sales tax). Hell I bought a house and will get to pay taxes on that annually for as long as I own it, despite already paying my state and fed govt taxes.

        • Pacattack57@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Just because everyone is getting fucked doesn’t mean it’s right. Double taxing only hurts the poor because they can’t hide money in tax free investments or businesses that they use to write off expenses.

    • nyctre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      Not that insane. Most people only concern themselves with their own issues. And if you’re a 40 year old whose childhood home is now worth 500k or whatever and you have to pay 200k in taxes in order to inherit it, then you probably want to vote against it because otherwise the government will take it.

      Okay, take all that with a grain of salt because I’m not too familiar with inheritance law, but it’s based on multiple similar stories I’ve heard from people.

      I still think it should be taxed, don’t get me wrong. But I understand why people are against it.

        • nyctre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          Yeah, it’s true that in this case most people would never have to care about that. When I replied I was thinking about inheritance taxes in general. My bad.

  • Oxysis/Oxy@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    If men have to sign up for the draft then it is only fair that women have to too. It’s unfair that only men have to risk being drafted and losing so much of their life to war.

    • Barrington@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      Personally, I think having a draft is a terrible idea regardless of gender.

      They voted down adding women to this already bad idea. Potentially in the future, they remove the draft altogether.

      I guess my point is, why would you want them to make the situation worse just so it is equal?

      • remon@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Potentially in the future, they remove the draft altogether.

        Support for mandatory military service in Switzerland has been going up in recent years, so I wouldn’t count on it.

    • hubobes@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      Oh give me a break, women are getting away worse in so many facets of life. When we have fixed discrimination against women we can talk about them doing mandatory civil service.

      Edit: Did not know that on Lemmy we have such an issue with women’s rights.

      • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days ago

        So? Are we supposed to have a fair, equal society or are we playing these games of measuring each other’s cocks?

        • hubobes@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 days ago

          Measure whatever you want but maybe first make it slightly more equal for the ones who have been disadvantaged for decades? But no, one party always focuses on the few things man have where they are slightly worse of.

          • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 days ago

            I’m a feminist and I honestly don’t understand this mentality. Mixing genders in all activities is good for our society, period.

            • hubobes@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 days ago

              Not if said activity is forced upon you. Women can already voluntarily join the military or civil service.

              • SlothMama@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 days ago

                So can men, but in this instance they’re also compelled. The ask here is that if men are compelled to service, women should be too. That’s obviously equal treatment and fair.

                • hubobes@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  5 days ago

                  Am I in the wrong movie? Women are at a huge disadvantage in life (Gender pay gap, workplace representation, unpaid care and domestic work, education and job positions, healthcare, part-time employment, promotion and career advancement, violence against women, political representation) and we should work to solve that but for some reason we first want to force them to also serve in the military while leaving the current system in place that puts them at a disadvantage? Oh the heavens, men have to serve for a single year…yes that is super important, not all the things they get a huge advantage in life?

    • XenGi@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      Statistically woman do so much more care work then men, they already served the country well. There is no need to also draft them. It’s only fair. It would also work if more men would take care of kids, the elderly or do other chores without any pay and skip any career for that.

      • Ember James@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        Being drafted is different than doing chores or working in care roles. Everyone capable should be responsible for the defense of those who are not in times of war regardless of sex.

        There are also plenty of care roles, and chores, in military service.

        Yes more Men should take on the life outside of work, but that has nothing to do with 50% of a countries population being forced to give up and risk their lives while the other isn’t even though they are capable of, and excel in, combat and support roles.

  • Miles O'Brien@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    Is Switzerland full of sexist people who think “someday I’LL be rich so I don’t want to tax MYSELF more, hypothetically maybe in the distant future”?

    • freijon@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      The main counter argument was that this tax would make Switzerland quite unattractive to rich people, and that they would simple leave the country so that they don’t have to pay this tax. And then Switzerland would even lose tax income overall.

      • Dragonstaff@leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        This argument is the knee jerk reaction to any tax proposal and should be laughed out of town as it has never ever actually happened.