5 ms·

Do you ever question your moral integrity? You’re in the US taking advantage of a society that doesn’t have good social systems and which is why the wage in the

by sysbin 7y ago

Do you ever question your moral integrity? You’re in the US taking advantage of a society that doesn’t have good social systems and which is why the wage in the US is high for skilled work. Then whenever you get sick you’ll return to a society with good social support but at the cost of lowering high wages. Seems you’re taking advantage of everything with ignorance and or desire. Whatever the case may be, I’m curious to your thoughts on this and I assume you’ve thought of it before.

chroma 7y ago
Hate the game, not the player. If it becomes a big enough problem, then EU countries could change their laws to make government-funded medical care conditional on paying certain amounts of taxes in-country.
- sysbin 7y ago
  > Hate the game, not the player. I agree with this, I'm not sure why I'm being downvoted for asking though because I think anyone would be curious to read personal testimony of their own situation. I would question myself if taking advantage of being in a country that strips social programs for keeping wages high for skilled employees. It's not like paying taxes negates that reality.
  - deanmoriarty 7y ago
    I would encourage you to read the comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20346775 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20346775 and answer that.
    - sysbin 7y ago
      Done, also thanks for writing your views. It's nice to read reasoning and more so from tech people because it's somewhat relatable being the same field as myself.
- luckylion 7y ago
  > Hate the game, not the player. That's a lame excuse for anti-social behavior. "Somebody has to get those kids addicted". Read some Kant, then ask yourself what would happen if everybody acted that way, taking all the benefits and then silently stepping out when it's time to give something back.
  - chroma 7y ago
    I know about the categorical imperative, but people aren’t saints. They follow incentives. The fix is to create incentives that make it easier to behave better, not chastise people for doing what benefits them. That said, I fail to see how his behavior is antisocial. He’s creating far more wealth in his current job than he could in the EU. If he ever moves back, he’ll bring millions of dollars with him and inject it into the local economy.
    - luckylion 7y ago
      > I know about the categorical imperative, but people aren’t saints It's not about sainthood, it's about ethics. > The fix is to create incentives that make it easier to behave better, not chastise people for doing what benefits them. Breaking the rules will always give him more benefit, unless we "chastise" (that is: punish) that behavior. There's little we can do to make not murdering people that stand between him and riches "better" but making him believe that we will punish him. Clearly, relying on ethics and/or rational acting won't work with that kind of people. > That said, I fail to see how his behavior is antisocial. There would be no society if everybody acted like him. > If he ever moves back, he’ll bring millions of dollars with him and inject it into the local economy. He will, as he stated, only move back if he gets seriously ill and requires the social net to catch him. He will only come back if he's going to cost money.
      - deanmoriarty 7y ago
        I am curious, how would you have acted in my shoes? A few alternative options I can think of: 1) Not even try to move to the US to pursue the dream of a world-class tech career (dream I had since I was 12), stay in my own EU country with a mind-numbing consultancy job (which again, it's the only kind of employment available since the country is mostly rural with a limited software industry) to be fully consistent with morals. This also means I won't be able to financially help my parents as a sign of gratitude for all they've done for me, since my salary will be barely enough to keep me afloat. 2) Move to the US and completely renounce to my EU citizenship, so I won't ever have a way to go back and "take advantage" of my EU country (meaning I wouldn't even be able to see parents and family without an immigration visa). 3) Move to the US, keep the EU citizenship, but completely deny to myself the option of eventually moving back if needed. So, if I get a massive debilitating cancer that will force me to quit my job and lose my health insurance in the US, I'll die without treatment and all alone (loving family is all in EU) but with morals. 4) Move to the US, keep the EU citizenship, keep the possibility of eventually moving to EU, but to be consistent with morals find a way to donate to my EU government a few hundreds/thousands a month to keep contributing to the social safety net even if I'm not a resident there (I don't believe that's even physically possible?). But certainly that wouldn't be enough to cover the expenses my government paid for my education, so I should also find a way to refund that? 5) Move to the US, keep the EU citizenship, and start a countdown mandating that in exactly N years (where N cannot be certainly changed!) I will move back to EU regardless of where I am in my career or health status, so I won't be able to just move to the EU at the most convenient time. I'm asking because it's easy to talk about problems at a philosophical level, but please try to step down from your judging pedestal and come back to the real world with real problems, thinking what YOU would have done in practice.
- xyzzyz 7y ago
  That's already how it is and has been for a long time in many EU countries, e.g. Poland, when you need to pay NFZ premiums to qualify for NFZ (i.e. state) health insurance.
deanmoriarty 7y ago
I don't see it that way. I am very committed to this country (US) and in fact I am also pursuing the citizenship process as a sign of long term commitment to it. The option of going back to EU is certainly something I keep in mind considering my European citizenship, but I don't necessarily look forward to it, at least not more than, say, all the hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people planning to move abroad or to a different state when they want to retire and/or switch gears in life. I hope to be a productive member of this society for many decades. Also, I am paying a massive amount of taxes to the US (effective tax rate in a coastal city can easily get to 40%+ on a tech salary), so I'm not taking advantage of anything at all. By your logic, I should also question my moral integrity because I am not planning to ever have kids (personal reasons), so I am effectively relying on others to spend their own money/time to raise new human beings that will provide services to me and pay for my social security when I'll be old, which doesn't make any sense.
- seanmcdirmid 7y ago
  A single person making $200k/year in San Francisco will pay an effective rate of 34% in federal, state, and payroll taxes. Only your marginal rate is above 40%, but income taxes are of course graduated. You don’t hit 40% until about $400k (in SF at least). So ya, if you are paying 40%, you are definitely in the 1%.
  - deanmoriarty 7y ago
    Yes, 400-500k is about the right range of compensation in SF for a senior software engineer working at FAANG, and that's about my number. Also, I'm single and renter so I get no tax benefits at all. But I'm not complaining about having to pay those taxes, it's a very reasonable price to pay for the massive opportunity being given to me, which I appreciate even more coming from EU, as I was saying before.
    - seanmcdirmid 7y ago
      Got it, people often mistake their marginal rates for their effective rates and think they are paying much more than they really are. The jump of only 6% seems a bit small actually for an extra $200k in income, but thats America.
gingabriska 7y ago
It likely won't work. As soon as he gets US citizenship, exit tax will be placed on him and now if he wants to quit US citizenship he pays a big exit tax and US citizens are taxed on their global income, so whenever he works next, he also pays taxes to the US.
- deanmoriarty 7y ago
  Curious to hear more details on this, but this is my current understanding: First, exit tax is not just contingent on citizenship, but also on long term permanent residency, so I am effectively already under that rule, citizenship or not. Also, while the exit tax is for sure draconian, it doesn't mean you'll have to necessarily pay a huge amount, it merely depends on the unrealized gains you have in your assets. In my case that's relatively small since I'm not a homeowner and I've been paying capital gain taxes all along. Second, most countries in the world (including the one where I have EU citizenship) have tax treaties with the US so that individuals who pay income or other taxes in a foreign country where they are resident for fiscal purposes will effectively obtain a foreign tax credit against the US taxes, avoiding double taxation. Since taxes in EU are higher than US, one wouldn't have to pay anything at all to the US. I've been dabbling with the US foreign tax for years myself due to some passive income generated in my home country, and I've always been able to claim full credit for it when filing my US taxes. Third, my plan would not be to "work next" somewhere in EU. When/if I decide to leave (which may be never), with 7 figures in assets I should be able to live a modest lifestyle out of passive income in my original EU country (very cheap cost of living), so taxes would be minimal, if any at all.
- xyzzyz 7y ago
  The exit tax is not some wealth/estate tax that will make a huge dent in your assets, it's simply making capital gains tax due on the date of leaving US, not on the date of the sale of capital asset. It's extremely easy to pay zero exit tax when you leave US: just liquidate all your positions, so that you only own cash. This way, you'll just pay capital gains tax instead of exit tax. Of course, there's no reason to do that, because both are equal.

by sysbin 7y ago

chroma 7y ago

Hate the game, not the player. If it becomes a big enough problem, then EU countries could change their laws to make government-funded medical care conditional on paying certain amounts of taxes in-country.

sysbin 7y ago
> Hate the game, not the player. I agree with this, I'm not sure why I'm being downvoted for asking though because I think anyone would be curious to read personal testimony of their own situation. I would question myself if taking advantage of being in a country that strips social programs for keeping wages high for skilled employees. It's not like paying taxes negates that reality.
- deanmoriarty 7y ago
  I would encourage you to read the comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20346775 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20346775 and answer that.
  - sysbin 7y ago
    Done, also thanks for writing your views. It's nice to read reasoning and more so from tech people because it's somewhat relatable being the same field as myself.
luckylion 7y ago
> Hate the game, not the player. That's a lame excuse for anti-social behavior. "Somebody has to get those kids addicted". Read some Kant, then ask yourself what would happen if everybody acted that way, taking all the benefits and then silently stepping out when it's time to give something back.
- chroma 7y ago
  I know about the categorical imperative, but people aren’t saints. They follow incentives. The fix is to create incentives that make it easier to behave better, not chastise people for doing what benefits them. That said, I fail to see how his behavior is antisocial. He’s creating far more wealth in his current job than he could in the EU. If he ever moves back, he’ll bring millions of dollars with him and inject it into the local economy.
  - luckylion 7y ago
    > I know about the categorical imperative, but people aren’t saints It's not about sainthood, it's about ethics. > The fix is to create incentives that make it easier to behave better, not chastise people for doing what benefits them. Breaking the rules will always give him more benefit, unless we "chastise" (that is: punish) that behavior. There's little we can do to make not murdering people that stand between him and riches "better" but making him believe that we will punish him. Clearly, relying on ethics and/or rational acting won't work with that kind of people. > That said, I fail to see how his behavior is antisocial. There would be no society if everybody acted like him. > If he ever moves back, he’ll bring millions of dollars with him and inject it into the local economy. He will, as he stated, only move back if he gets seriously ill and requires the social net to catch him. He will only come back if he's going to cost money.
    - deanmoriarty 7y ago
      I am curious, how would you have acted in my shoes? A few alternative options I can think of: 1) Not even try to move to the US to pursue the dream of a world-class tech career (dream I had since I was 12), stay in my own EU country with a mind-numbing consultancy job (which again, it's the only kind of employment available since the country is mostly rural with a limited software industry) to be fully consistent with morals. This also means I won't be able to financially help my parents as a sign of gratitude for all they've done for me, since my salary will be barely enough to keep me afloat. 2) Move to the US and completely renounce to my EU citizenship, so I won't ever have a way to go back and "take advantage" of my EU country (meaning I wouldn't even be able to see parents and family without an immigration visa). 3) Move to the US, keep the EU citizenship, but completely deny to myself the option of eventually moving back if needed. So, if I get a massive debilitating cancer that will force me to quit my job and lose my health insurance in the US, I'll die without treatment and all alone (loving family is all in EU) but with morals. 4) Move to the US, keep the EU citizenship, keep the possibility of eventually moving to EU, but to be consistent with morals find a way to donate to my EU government a few hundreds/thousands a month to keep contributing to the social safety net even if I'm not a resident there (I don't believe that's even physically possible?). But certainly that wouldn't be enough to cover the expenses my government paid for my education, so I should also find a way to refund that? 5) Move to the US, keep the EU citizenship, and start a countdown mandating that in exactly N years (where N cannot be certainly changed!) I will move back to EU regardless of where I am in my career or health status, so I won't be able to just move to the EU at the most convenient time. I'm asking because it's easy to talk about problems at a philosophical level, but please try to step down from your judging pedestal and come back to the real world with real problems, thinking what YOU would have done in practice.
xyzzyz 7y ago
That's already how it is and has been for a long time in many EU countries, e.g. Poland, when you need to pay NFZ premiums to qualify for NFZ (i.e. state) health insurance.

deanmoriarty 7y ago

I don't see it that way. I am very committed to this country (US) and in fact I am also pursuing the citizenship process as a sign of long term commitment to it. The option of going back to EU is certainly something I keep in mind considering my European citizenship, but I don't necessarily look forward to it, at least not more than, say, all the hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people planning to move abroad or to a different state when they want to retire and/or switch gears in life. I hope to be a productive member of this society for many decades. Also, I am paying a massive amount of taxes to the US (effective tax rate in a coastal city can easily get to 40%+ on a tech salary), so I'm not taking advantage of anything at all. By your logic, I should also question my moral integrity because I am not planning to ever have kids (personal reasons), so I am effectively relying on others to spend their own money/time to raise new human beings that will provide services to me and pay for my social security when I'll be old, which doesn't make any sense.

seanmcdirmid 7y ago
A single person making $200k/year in San Francisco will pay an effective rate of 34% in federal, state, and payroll taxes. Only your marginal rate is above 40%, but income taxes are of course graduated. You don’t hit 40% until about $400k (in SF at least). So ya, if you are paying 40%, you are definitely in the 1%.
- deanmoriarty 7y ago
  Yes, 400-500k is about the right range of compensation in SF for a senior software engineer working at FAANG, and that's about my number. Also, I'm single and renter so I get no tax benefits at all. But I'm not complaining about having to pay those taxes, it's a very reasonable price to pay for the massive opportunity being given to me, which I appreciate even more coming from EU, as I was saying before.
  - seanmcdirmid 7y ago
    Got it, people often mistake their marginal rates for their effective rates and think they are paying much more than they really are. The jump of only 6% seems a bit small actually for an extra $200k in income, but thats America.

gingabriska 7y ago

It likely won't work. As soon as he gets US citizenship, exit tax will be placed on him and now if he wants to quit US citizenship he pays a big exit tax and US citizens are taxed on their global income, so whenever he works next, he also pays taxes to the US.

deanmoriarty 7y ago
Curious to hear more details on this, but this is my current understanding: First, exit tax is not just contingent on citizenship, but also on long term permanent residency, so I am effectively already under that rule, citizenship or not. Also, while the exit tax is for sure draconian, it doesn't mean you'll have to necessarily pay a huge amount, it merely depends on the unrealized gains you have in your assets. In my case that's relatively small since I'm not a homeowner and I've been paying capital gain taxes all along. Second, most countries in the world (including the one where I have EU citizenship) have tax treaties with the US so that individuals who pay income or other taxes in a foreign country where they are resident for fiscal purposes will effectively obtain a foreign tax credit against the US taxes, avoiding double taxation. Since taxes in EU are higher than US, one wouldn't have to pay anything at all to the US. I've been dabbling with the US foreign tax for years myself due to some passive income generated in my home country, and I've always been able to claim full credit for it when filing my US taxes. Third, my plan would not be to "work next" somewhere in EU. When/if I decide to leave (which may be never), with 7 figures in assets I should be able to live a modest lifestyle out of passive income in my original EU country (very cheap cost of living), so taxes would be minimal, if any at all.
xyzzyz 7y ago
The exit tax is not some wealth/estate tax that will make a huge dent in your assets, it's simply making capital gains tax due on the date of leaving US, not on the date of the sale of capital asset. It's extremely easy to pay zero exit tax when you leave US: just liquidate all your positions, so that you only own cash. This way, you'll just pay capital gains tax instead of exit tax. Of course, there's no reason to do that, because both are equal.