5 ms·

A statement like this probably needs a source or two to first show it is true (wealth taxes actually are causing rich people to flee) second, show that they act

A statement like this probably needs a source or two to first show it is true (wealth taxes actually are causing rich people to flee) second, show that they actually do take their spend/invest/hire money with them and finally that it is harmful that that happens. Leaving creates a vacuum and if the rich really are leaving then it would be a big vacuum that clearly can't be filled with someone else that is rich since they are all leaving. Without someone big there to fill the vacuum it that implies it is being filled with a lot of smaller companies. This actually sounds like a good thing to me to tell you the truth. Can we emphasize this effect?

WalterBright 2y ago
Jeff Bezos famously left the state just before the Washington's new cap gains tax targeted at him was set to go into effect. I know other people with 8 figure fortunes who left, too. I didn't know it was controversial that spending a lot of money in a local economy makes it more prosperous, and when a big spender leaves, the local economy goes down. The Rust Belt is an example of the latter.
- shakow 2y ago
  > spending a lot of money in a local economy makes it more prosperous Do these people really spend a lot of money in the local economy? Realistically, even assuming they pay a couple dozen people $100k/year for service and indulge daily in 3 $500 meals, what will be the actual influence on the local economy? > The Rust Belt is an example of the latter. The Rust Belt is an example of what happens when the state allows companies to leave, build their gadgets for a tenth of the price across the Pacific, then sell them back home without serious tariffs; not an example of what happens when Mr. Studebaker or Mrs. Bethlehem Steel leave for Florida.
  - WalterBright 2y ago
    Zillionaire Paul Allen was famous for spending billions in the local economy. He transformed Seattle. He's passed away, and his projects are being sold off and closed down. > the state allows companies to leave If you have to build a wall around your state to keep people from fleeing, you have failed.
    - Avicebron 2y ago
      No, if you are moving a high levels of capital and can exploit populations that haven't moved as fast as you (Mexico <- causal <- rust belt, etc) you are essentially playing a shell game but have fast hands because you can move more efficiently across larger sections of the globe and local demographics than someone from that population. It's predatory, and ultimately leads to "deserts" where the parasite has booked it to a location where the resource pipeline is more efficient thus more profits can be siphoned without a drop in metrics.
      - WalterBright 2y ago
        Building factories in Mexico is not exploitation - it raises the standard of living of the people who decide that working at those factories is better than what they had otherwise.
    - shakow 2y ago
      > If you have to build a wall around your state to keep people from fleeing It's not really about building a wall around your country to keep people from fleeing, but to prevent gadgets sold by people leveraging arbitrage in an unfair way to get in – or, as we call them for now millenia, tariffs.
      - WalterBright 2y ago
        Arbitrage is a major reason why free market companies prosper. It's taking advantage of the Law of Comparative Advantage. For example, consider Bob and Fred. Bob is good at hunting, but stinks at growing blueberries. Fred grows luscious blueberries, but he's likely to blow his own foot off when hunting. Bob brings home twice the meat he needs, and Fred grows twice the blueberries he needs, and they trade. They are both better off than if Bob and Fred each only fended for themselves. BTW, back in the 80s, my (British) partner at Zortech noticed that boxed software in Britain sold for twice as much as the same box in the US. So he would order large quantities of boxes from the US, mark them up, and sell them locally at a nice profit. Eventually, other businessmen caught on and this no longer worked. That's arbitrage in action. It benefits consumers.
- arrosenberg 2y ago
  This isn't a feudal country and a single magnate leaving will barely affect the economy. What affected the Rust Belt, and is causing problems nationally, is that ultrawealthy people like Jeff Bezos are manipulating the government to change the laws in ways that allow him more concentration of wealth and power at the expense of the middle class. The lack of a middle class is what causes an economy to go down, and that is why the Rust Belt is suffering economically. People like Bezos, the Waltons, the Kochs are causing harm to the economy, they're not propping it up in any sense.
  - WalterBright 2y ago
    The Rust Belt long predated Amazon. How is Bezos extracting money from the middle class?
    - arrosenberg 2y ago
      I refuse to believe the Rust Belt existed before 1995. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
      - WalterBright 2y ago
        > The Rust Belt experienced industrial decline starting in the 1950s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rust_Belt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rust_Belt
        arrosenberg 2y ago
        And? Amazon is still an avatar for the neoliberalism that killed the Rust Belt. They didn't start the fire, they just pour gas on it every day.
        danaris 2y ago
        This is called "moving the goalposts", and however good your underlying point about Amazon's perfidy might be, it does nothing but make you look like you're wrong and you know it. You were wrong about the Rust Belt, and it's OK to admit that and move on.
- skybrian 2y ago
  And yet, Microsoft and Amazon are still there. Isn’t that what matters? I see people moving to other states as a form of load balancing.
  - WalterBright 2y ago
    People living and spending their money in the same place is irrelevant to the local economy? The taxes they pay into the local economy have produced obvious civic booms in places like Redmond and Bellevue. BTW, the Ferrari dealer moved to be close by the Microsoft campus.
    - skybrian 2y ago
      I think it’s relevant, but also, there are a lot of people coming and going. If housing prices are high and traffic is bad, pointing at some rich people leaving seems sort like saying “nobody goes there anymore, it’s too crowded.”
      - WalterBright 2y ago
        Rich people leaving isn't going to reduce the traffic significantly, but it will reduce economy significantly.

WalterBright 2y ago

Jeff Bezos famously left the state just before the Washington's new cap gains tax targeted at him was set to go into effect. I know other people with 8 figure fortunes who left, too. I didn't know it was controversial that spending a lot of money in a local economy makes it more prosperous, and when a big spender leaves, the local economy goes down. The Rust Belt is an example of the latter.

shakow 2y ago
> spending a lot of money in a local economy makes it more prosperous Do these people really spend a lot of money in the local economy? Realistically, even assuming they pay a couple dozen people $100k/year for service and indulge daily in 3 $500 meals, what will be the actual influence on the local economy? > The Rust Belt is an example of the latter. The Rust Belt is an example of what happens when the state allows companies to leave, build their gadgets for a tenth of the price across the Pacific, then sell them back home without serious tariffs; not an example of what happens when Mr. Studebaker or Mrs. Bethlehem Steel leave for Florida.
- WalterBright 2y ago
  Zillionaire Paul Allen was famous for spending billions in the local economy. He transformed Seattle. He's passed away, and his projects are being sold off and closed down. > the state allows companies to leave If you have to build a wall around your state to keep people from fleeing, you have failed.
  - Avicebron 2y ago
    No, if you are moving a high levels of capital and can exploit populations that haven't moved as fast as you (Mexico <- causal <- rust belt, etc) you are essentially playing a shell game but have fast hands because you can move more efficiently across larger sections of the globe and local demographics than someone from that population. It's predatory, and ultimately leads to "deserts" where the parasite has booked it to a location where the resource pipeline is more efficient thus more profits can be siphoned without a drop in metrics.
    - WalterBright 2y ago
      Building factories in Mexico is not exploitation - it raises the standard of living of the people who decide that working at those factories is better than what they had otherwise.
  - shakow 2y ago
    > If you have to build a wall around your state to keep people from fleeing It's not really about building a wall around your country to keep people from fleeing, but to prevent gadgets sold by people leveraging arbitrage in an unfair way to get in – or, as we call them for now millenia, tariffs.
    - WalterBright 2y ago
      Arbitrage is a major reason why free market companies prosper. It's taking advantage of the Law of Comparative Advantage. For example, consider Bob and Fred. Bob is good at hunting, but stinks at growing blueberries. Fred grows luscious blueberries, but he's likely to blow his own foot off when hunting. Bob brings home twice the meat he needs, and Fred grows twice the blueberries he needs, and they trade. They are both better off than if Bob and Fred each only fended for themselves. BTW, back in the 80s, my (British) partner at Zortech noticed that boxed software in Britain sold for twice as much as the same box in the US. So he would order large quantities of boxes from the US, mark them up, and sell them locally at a nice profit. Eventually, other businessmen caught on and this no longer worked. That's arbitrage in action. It benefits consumers.
arrosenberg 2y ago
This isn't a feudal country and a single magnate leaving will barely affect the economy. What affected the Rust Belt, and is causing problems nationally, is that ultrawealthy people like Jeff Bezos are manipulating the government to change the laws in ways that allow him more concentration of wealth and power at the expense of the middle class. The lack of a middle class is what causes an economy to go down, and that is why the Rust Belt is suffering economically. People like Bezos, the Waltons, the Kochs are causing harm to the economy, they're not propping it up in any sense.
- WalterBright 2y ago
  The Rust Belt long predated Amazon. How is Bezos extracting money from the middle class?
  - arrosenberg 2y ago
    I refuse to believe the Rust Belt existed before 1995. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
    - WalterBright 2y ago
      > The Rust Belt experienced industrial decline starting in the 1950s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rust_Belt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rust_Belt
      - arrosenberg 2y ago
        And? Amazon is still an avatar for the neoliberalism that killed the Rust Belt. They didn't start the fire, they just pour gas on it every day.
        danaris 2y ago
        This is called "moving the goalposts", and however good your underlying point about Amazon's perfidy might be, it does nothing but make you look like you're wrong and you know it. You were wrong about the Rust Belt, and it's OK to admit that and move on.
skybrian 2y ago
And yet, Microsoft and Amazon are still there. Isn’t that what matters? I see people moving to other states as a form of load balancing.
- WalterBright 2y ago
  People living and spending their money in the same place is irrelevant to the local economy? The taxes they pay into the local economy have produced obvious civic booms in places like Redmond and Bellevue. BTW, the Ferrari dealer moved to be close by the Microsoft campus.
  - skybrian 2y ago
    I think it’s relevant, but also, there are a lot of people coming and going. If housing prices are high and traffic is bad, pointing at some rich people leaving seems sort like saying “nobody goes there anymore, it’s too crowded.”
    - WalterBright 2y ago
      Rich people leaving isn't going to reduce the traffic significantly, but it will reduce economy significantly.