Taxes

• Socialists: No. Progressive income taxes are a fundamental tool for redistributing wealth and financing public services (health, education, social protection). They are essential for social justice.
• Conservatives: Yes. Lower taxes encourage investment, job creation and economic growth. They encourage individual initiative and reduce government waste. Taxes must be fair and low.
• Libertarians: Yes. Taxes are a form of state theft and an impediment to private property. It should be drastically reduced or abolished in favor of voluntary taxation or entirely private services.
• Centrists: A tax system must be balanced. A certain degree of progressivity is necessary for solidarity, but taxes that are too high can discourage investment. The goal is a system that finances essential services without stifling the economy.

Minimum wage

• Socialists: No. The minimum wage is essential to guarantee a dignified life for workers, reduce inequalities and fight poverty. It is a tool of social justice that protects the most vulnerable.
• Conservatives: In principle, no, the market must play its role as regulator. However, a minimum wage may be tolerable if it does not excessively hinder the competitiveness of companies. What's important is individual responsibility and job creation, rather than dependence on subsidies.
• Libertarians: Yes. The minimum wage is an artificial intervention that distorts the labor market, creates unemployment and violates freedom of contract. The market should determine wages through negotiation.
• Centrists: No, the minimum wage has an important social role. It must exist, but its level must be adjusted pragmatically to avoid destroying jobs, taking into account the competitiveness of companies and the purchasing power of workers.

Health care

• Socialists: No. Access to healthcare is a fundamental right, not a commodity. The State must guarantee a universal, publicly-funded healthcare system, so that everyone has access to care, regardless of income.
• Conservatives: For the most part, yes. Private markets can be more efficient and reduce the tax burden. The state can play a minimal role for the poorest, but individual responsibility and private insurance are preferable.
• Libertarians: Yes. Healthcare is a service like any other. The private market is more efficient, innovative and offers consumers more choice. Government intervention leads to inefficiency and bureaucracy. But above all, individuals have the right to choose for themselves if they want to opt out of the social security system.
• Centrists: A mixed system is often the best approach. The State must guarantee universal access and solidarity (basic coverage), while leaving room for the private sector to diversify the offer and innovate, in order to optimize efficiency and quality.

The environment

• Socialists: No. The state must impose strict regulations to protect the environment and combat climate change. The market alone cannot solve these problems, which require collective action and planning. Subsidies are considered necessary to ensure the ecological transition. Moreover, international free trade must be regulated to protect the environment.
• Conservatives: In principle, yes, because freedom of enterprise is important. However, a certain level of regulation is necessary to protect the environment as a heritage and resource, but without stifling the economy.
• Libertarians: Yes. Environmental regulations are a hindrance to economic freedom and property ownership. They believe that the best way to protect the environment is through private property, not through bureaucratic organizations. They add that owners are more likely to take care of their property, as they have a vested interest in preserving its value. Environmental problems can be solved by the market, individual responsibility and property rights. Polluters must be held responsible for the damage they cause to the environment.
• Centrists: No, self-regulation is not enough. Environmental regulations are necessary to protect the planet and public health. However, they must be designed in such a way as not to penalize business competitiveness excessively, and to encourage green innovation.

Subsidies

• Socialists: No. Subsidies may be necessary to support innovation, protect jobs, develop strategic sectors or ensure the ecological transition. The State's role is that of an economic player and planner.
• Conservatives: In principle, yes, to encourage free competition and individual corporate responsibility. However, exceptions can be made for strategic or national industries that are vital to the country's security or employment.
• Libertarians: Yes. Subsidies and bailouts distort the market, favor some companies over others, and create dependency on the state. Companies that fail should go bankrupt.
• Centrists: In general, yes, but with exceptions. Subsidies should be targeted and temporary, justified by a general interest (innovation, ecological transition, strategic sectors). Bailouts should only be considered in the event of a major systemic threat to the economy.