4 ms·

I think you’re right. But what people don’t realize is the the rich and the even the upper class aren’t stuck with this country and generally don’t feel much a

I think you’re right. But what people don’t realize is the the rich and the even the upper class aren’t stuck with this country and generally don’t feel much allegiance to it. They can benefit from lax regulation and low taxes and political turbulence and simply leave when things get out of control. It’s fun watching elites squirm but they have an exit plan. Most Americans can’t. They don’t have the skills or the money to go anywhere else. Using your politics to troll the elites is very much an example of cutting off your nose to spite your face. I wonder how long it’ll take for people to realize that.

germinalphrase 6y ago
While they certainly would have the resources “to go anywhere else” - where would all these very rich people actually want to go? Where can they maintain a high status lifestyle while also enjoying low taxes? Maybe I’m wrong, but it seems like a mighty short list and, hence, an empty threat.
- charlesu 6y ago
  It depends on the threat. If the United States actually descends into any real chaos they can and will bail. For now, they can just move to their second home in Montana. But if gets bad, they’ll leave. They always do.
  - germinalphrase 6y ago
    Sure. Which is true of all people. You don’t have to be rich to flee violence. I guess my question relates more to the idea that the US has a “business friendly” economic regime and any change to that status quo is going to cause the very rich to leave. I’m sure a few will move to Monaco (as suggested by the other poster) but I’m not super convinced there are a bunch of viable alternative places to live.
- nemo44x 6y ago
  > Where can they maintain a high status lifestyle while also enjoying low taxes? Monaco.
  - mellavora 6y ago
    And skiing in Andora.
  - malandrew 6y ago
    I would also say that cold places are also a good option relatively speaking as they aren't very forgiving if you can't provide yourself with a warm home through the winter. This is why rampant poverty such as tent cities tend to migrate to cities with warmer or at least moderate climates. Norway, Iceland, Canada, etc.
    - nemo44x 6y ago
      I guess it sort of makes sense that it appears much of the homelessness in Canada clusters around Vancouver since it is far more mild than the Eastern portion of the country.
marcosdumay 6y ago
It's worse than that. Modern day populists usually don't harm the elites, and don't benefit anybody but the poorest segment of society. Many don't even benefit the poorest segment, only harm everybody but the elite. Modern populism is just a set of lies, where they harm poor people on less visible ways to make money available to distribute, most of it to the elites, and a small share back but on very visible ways. It is not the elite that sustain governments nowadays, so it can't really be any different.
eli_gottlieb 6y ago
>But what people don’t realize is the the rich and the even the upper class aren’t stuck with this country and generally don’t feel much allegiance to it. Spicy take: the nationalist branch of populist voters are very aware of this, and are actively exploiting it to make the internationally mobile professional class suffer.
- charlesu 6y ago
  Seems like a bad strategy. America’s technological and cultural relevance depends on the internationally mobile professional class.
  - eli_gottlieb 6y ago
    When you put it before the voters as America's relevance to the international order versus their houses, jobs, and communities, they're gonna choose the latter.
  - charlesu 6y ago
    > When you put it before the voters as America's relevance to the international order versus their houses, jobs, and communities, they're gonna choose the latter. It’s sad because they’re not getting those things through nationalism either. In fact they’ll lose international relevance and their homes, jobs, and communities because of the folks selling them nationalism.
newen 6y ago
So what if they leave? The Federal Reserve is in the United States, so is the political power, the military, the banks, the land, the factories, etc, etc, etc. The US government can tax US citizens from anywhere in the world. The government can print or redistributed as much money as they want. A few people leaving a country and taking some gold with them won't matter in the end.

germinalphrase 6y ago

While they certainly would have the resources “to go anywhere else” - where would all these very rich people actually want to go? Where can they maintain a high status lifestyle while also enjoying low taxes? Maybe I’m wrong, but it seems like a mighty short list and, hence, an empty threat.

charlesu 6y ago
It depends on the threat. If the United States actually descends into any real chaos they can and will bail. For now, they can just move to their second home in Montana. But if gets bad, they’ll leave. They always do.
- germinalphrase 6y ago
  Sure. Which is true of all people. You don’t have to be rich to flee violence. I guess my question relates more to the idea that the US has a “business friendly” economic regime and any change to that status quo is going to cause the very rich to leave. I’m sure a few will move to Monaco (as suggested by the other poster) but I’m not super convinced there are a bunch of viable alternative places to live.
nemo44x 6y ago
> Where can they maintain a high status lifestyle while also enjoying low taxes? Monaco.
- mellavora 6y ago
  And skiing in Andora.
- malandrew 6y ago
  I would also say that cold places are also a good option relatively speaking as they aren't very forgiving if you can't provide yourself with a warm home through the winter. This is why rampant poverty such as tent cities tend to migrate to cities with warmer or at least moderate climates. Norway, Iceland, Canada, etc.
  - nemo44x 6y ago
    I guess it sort of makes sense that it appears much of the homelessness in Canada clusters around Vancouver since it is far more mild than the Eastern portion of the country.

marcosdumay 6y ago

It's worse than that. Modern day populists usually don't harm the elites, and don't benefit anybody but the poorest segment of society. Many don't even benefit the poorest segment, only harm everybody but the elite. Modern populism is just a set of lies, where they harm poor people on less visible ways to make money available to distribute, most of it to the elites, and a small share back but on very visible ways. It is not the elite that sustain governments nowadays, so it can't really be any different.

eli_gottlieb 6y ago

>But what people don’t realize is the the rich and the even the upper class aren’t stuck with this country and generally don’t feel much allegiance to it. Spicy take: the nationalist branch of populist voters are very aware of this, and are actively exploiting it to make the internationally mobile professional class suffer.

charlesu 6y ago
Seems like a bad strategy. America’s technological and cultural relevance depends on the internationally mobile professional class.
- eli_gottlieb 6y ago
  When you put it before the voters as America's relevance to the international order versus their houses, jobs, and communities, they're gonna choose the latter.
- charlesu 6y ago
  > When you put it before the voters as America's relevance to the international order versus their houses, jobs, and communities, they're gonna choose the latter. It’s sad because they’re not getting those things through nationalism either. In fact they’ll lose international relevance and their homes, jobs, and communities because of the folks selling them nationalism.

newen 6y ago

So what if they leave? The Federal Reserve is in the United States, so is the political power, the military, the banks, the land, the factories, etc, etc, etc. The US government can tax US citizens from anywhere in the world. The government can print or redistributed as much money as they want. A few people leaving a country and taking some gold with them won't matter in the end.