3 ms·
they aren't free to leave if you setup the right policies. just seize all their assets through imminent domain and don't allow them back in the country. Obvio
by sharemywin 4y ago
they aren't free to leave if you setup the right policies.
just seize all their assets through imminent domain and don't allow them back in the country.
Obviously a little extreme but there are a lot of policy options between do nothing and the most extreme.
- GalenErso 4y agoThat would be illegal. Private property is private property. It belongs to the individual, not the state. The state can use eminent domain if it wants to build a road for example, but not to retaliate against a person leaving.
- eynsham 4y agoPresumably the suggestion is to enact legislation under which the state would effect such seizures, which wouldn’t facially be unlawful. It might be unconstitutional, or impermissible in a rechtstaat, or inconsistent with a basic structure, but that wouldn’t be the case everywhere. In the Norwegian case the unconstitutional operation of a law is disapplied inter partes but not erga omnes at least de jure, although the state may take a hint.
- xyzzy4747 4y agoEven better, make it like East Germany and set up barbed wire and guard posts to prevent people from leaving. Life would be so great.
- refurb 4y agoSounds like a great way to make sure nobody invests in your country in the first place!
- red-iron-pine 4y agoi.e. Argentina and their constantly poor choices
- sharemywin 4y agoI'm trying to point out there are a spectrum of policy options and the whole thing is not black and white like most people look at it. taxes are knobs and dials not on off switches. also, the levels of those taxes make sense based on the economy and the outcomes desired. some services can be managed better by private enterprise and others by the government. It takes money to fund those government services.