4 ms·

> having more smart people eventually benefits Dutch society Given that most of them don't stay for even five years[0], how does their temporary presence benef

• vidarh 3y ago
  It's they stay that short, how much do they tend to rely on taxable benefits? Someone who stays a few years at the peak of above average earnings might well be highly economically beneficial even at a steep tax discount. I don't think governments ought to compete on tax in general, but this is one where it might both be a net benefit and there is the arguable case that most tax systems are geared towards people in working age overpaying to compensate for the cost of caring for children and the elderly. Someone who comes temporarily during working age without a discount will get the downside without the benefit. This will be a bigger problem for the competitive ability in places with comprehensive social support mechanisms. Given dropping birth rates, trying to offset that to be an attractive place to immigrate to may well be worth it even if most leave again - especially as long as it's profitable too. But if your concern is that it doesn't attract people who will stay, maybe there are ways to incentivise that too. E.g. let people earn a discount where a portion does not pay out unless they stay longer.
• epups 3y ago
  Having a foreigner stay in the long term could be worse, economically. Five years of taxation on highly-paid individuals - who are presumably producing far more than their salary to the companies paying them - is essentially free money for the country. You did not spend tax money on their education so far and are reaping all the benefits. Now, if they stay permanently, you will have to pay their pensions and healthcare, which are very expensive.
  • logifail 3y ago
    > You did not spend tax money on their education so far and are reaping all the benefits That is one possibility. Another is that the foreigner may have got the job instead of it going to a local. It's also possible that as a result of that the local may be unemployed and hence costing the country money.
    • epups 3y ago
      In my experience Europe has a dramatic shortage of highly skilled workers, in technology and healthcare in particular. There are simply not enough qualified workers. I also believe that the economy is not a zero sum game where there is a finite number of jobs. If the Netherlands suddenly absorbed 20k Silicon Valley workers, they would not simply replace 20k local workers. One of them might even create a company that ends up employing that amount of people.
    • shiroiuma 3y ago
      >Another is that the foreigner may have got the job instead of it going to a local. The birth rate is falling and well below replacement level already, and talent shortages are well-known to be a problem. It's too late to worry about protecting the jobs of locals.
      • logifail 3y ago
        > It's too late to worry about protecting the jobs of locals What does one offer to locals to show them that they matter? Remember that all locals - even if they are poor or unemployed - have a vote. If one washes one's hands of an entire group one should not be surprised the next time an election comes round if the outcome is a form of protest.
        • epups 3y ago
          The Netherlands already voted for a Eurosceptic, invoking similar rhetoric as you here - "replacement" of locals by foreigners, taking their jobs, etc. Interestingly, as is almost always the case in Europe, the places with fewer immigrants voted more harshly against them. The question we should ask is whether this is rational or not. I think not. If the Dutch want to vote themselves into a Brexit, then so be it - the foreigners will go elsewhere, trade barriers will be erected to "protect" the local economy, and time will tell who will be ahead economically and culturally.