4 ms·

California has 40 million people Any place where just a tiny fraction, less than 1%, want to check out will get a wild market distortion. Whether it was all t

California has 40 million people Any place where just a tiny fraction, less than 1%, want to check out will get a wild market distortion. Whether it was all those small and medium sized towns getting remote workers during the Alpha and hardcore Delta days Or places in Portugal The story will be the same

rektide 4y ago
> Any place where just a tiny fraction, less than 1%, want to check out will get a wild market distortion. Completely & totally ignores the scale of market impact an expat/wealthy-immigrant people have. There's plenty of people who would rather live somewhere else. Most have limited ability to move somewhere & make an impact. This story is about as opposite as that as can be told: the worlds 0.03% want cheaper places to live & will go commandeer their way into a conceniently available low priced local economy. What your thesis totally avoids is that the the wealthy can afford & have the possibility of seeking lower costs of living, of setting themselves up high elsewhere. They will displace both locals & other people who might seek to immigrate to a specificly advantageous place. There's hardly a scene more tragic to imagine. There may be some modest benefit for this area, but doubtful. This will just create market pressure in one of the few places that had been affordable.
- vmception 4y ago
  So, which part of what you wrote was the opposite of what I wrote? California has a lot of people that fit the bill that you just described. This is an LATimes article about Californians in Portugal. Everywhere I went over the last 2 years had California remote workers doing the same thing in that location. California has a lot of decently capitalized remote workers who dont require to be subjects of California’s or America’s problems.
  - rektide 4y ago
    > So, which part of what you wrote was the opposite of what I wrote? The part where you said any group of people, and I said a very wealthy group of people.
    - vmception 4y ago
      I think there are at least 400,000 Californians (1%) that are wealthy enough and flexible enough to be in that global 0.03% cohort you mentioned
      - rektide 4y ago
        > that the world’s wealthiest 1% is not entirely made up of billionaires, but contains a significant number of people whose assets amount to $759,900 or over. Indeed, there are only 123,000 ultra high net worth individuals (defined as those whose assets exceed $50 million) worldwide. As a group, however, they lay claim to 45% of the world’s wealth. [1] In this regard, although your estimate is wildly vastly over-optistic, I tend to agree with your premise. Yes, around 400k Californians probably do pose a vast & significant threat to global order & probably are one of the biggest most exploitative & dangerous forces on the planet. This particular state is home to people vastly more compensated than anywhere else. And they will wreak havoc upon the lower priced markets they seek to exploit & live well amongst. [1] https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/10/who-are-the-1-the-answer-might-surprise-you/ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/10/who-are-the-1-the-ans...

rektide 4y ago

> Any place where just a tiny fraction, less than 1%, want to check out will get a wild market distortion. Completely & totally ignores the scale of market impact an expat/wealthy-immigrant people have. There's plenty of people who would rather live somewhere else. Most have limited ability to move somewhere & make an impact. This story is about as opposite as that as can be told: the worlds 0.03% want cheaper places to live & will go commandeer their way into a conceniently available low priced local economy. What your thesis totally avoids is that the the wealthy can afford & have the possibility of seeking lower costs of living, of setting themselves up high elsewhere. They will displace both locals & other people who might seek to immigrate to a specificly advantageous place. There's hardly a scene more tragic to imagine. There may be some modest benefit for this area, but doubtful. This will just create market pressure in one of the few places that had been affordable.

vmception 4y ago
So, which part of what you wrote was the opposite of what I wrote? California has a lot of people that fit the bill that you just described. This is an LATimes article about Californians in Portugal. Everywhere I went over the last 2 years had California remote workers doing the same thing in that location. California has a lot of decently capitalized remote workers who dont require to be subjects of California’s or America’s problems.
- rektide 4y ago
  > So, which part of what you wrote was the opposite of what I wrote? The part where you said any group of people, and I said a very wealthy group of people.
  - vmception 4y ago
    I think there are at least 400,000 Californians (1%) that are wealthy enough and flexible enough to be in that global 0.03% cohort you mentioned
    - rektide 4y ago
      > that the world’s wealthiest 1% is not entirely made up of billionaires, but contains a significant number of people whose assets amount to $759,900 or over. Indeed, there are only 123,000 ultra high net worth individuals (defined as those whose assets exceed $50 million) worldwide. As a group, however, they lay claim to 45% of the world’s wealth. [1] In this regard, although your estimate is wildly vastly over-optistic, I tend to agree with your premise. Yes, around 400k Californians probably do pose a vast & significant threat to global order & probably are one of the biggest most exploitative & dangerous forces on the planet. This particular state is home to people vastly more compensated than anywhere else. And they will wreak havoc upon the lower priced markets they seek to exploit & live well amongst. [1] https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/10/who-are-the-1-the-answer-might-surprise-you/ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/10/who-are-the-1-the-ans...