3 ms·
And if you could allow them to leave without taxing them 50% of their wealth on the way out the door, a lot of them would go. You pretty much hit the nail on th
by krisroadruck 10y ago
And if you could allow them to leave without taxing them 50% of their wealth on the way out the door, a lot of them would go. You pretty much hit the nail on the head in 2 directions. People are not given the option to vote with thier feet or their dollars. I know I wont ever need social security (if it even still exists by the time I want to stop making money) and yet I can not opt out of it. Why? The reason why is I'm not paying into my own retirement at all, I'm funding someone elses. I'd even happily give up everything I've already paid in if I could just stop paying in the future.
Also this notion of a well protected society is total bunk. I could have paid $50K in taxes last year as a self employed guy, but if my business collapses this year and I don't have a wife or children there is no safety net for me. The government isn't going to swoop in and pay for my rent and bills while I get back on my feet. Something I could have easily accomplished for myself with those same $50K. The federal safety net pretty much excludes childless single men entirely.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- kalleboo 10y agoYou're talking about the US now right? The US is a special kind of fucked up. No way I'm going to defend that, I'm Swedish. We have safety nets and self-funded public pensions (you can even choose the investment).
- krisroadruck 10y agoIndeed I am. Good catch. Yeah Sweden has a better deal all around. And you guys even have decent pervasive internet!