2 ms·

> People don't want to contribute to the country that made them rich. That's such a mean take. A fairer take is that they have already contributed - via income

> People don't want to contribute to the country that made them rich. That's such a mean take. A fairer take is that they have already contributed - via income/gains taxes - and often because the company makes the country better off. Wealth taxes are double taxation: you've worked to get rewards and then those rewards are rug-pulled from you. Wealth taxes are also a lie: the Finland wealth tax rate of 1.1% appears so reasonable, however if your returns were 5% then the effective tax rate is fucking 22%. If a country doesn't encourage businesses and business-owners, then the country goes to shit because there's nothing to tax (which pays for the goodness for everybody). Disclaimer: I don't think all businesses are good or worthwhile. I do think that we need systems that deliver good compromises. Edit: As voters we are asked to vote for party policy - however we are usually ignorant of the likely outcomes of policy. In my experience, very few people understand systems.

chairmansteve 1y ago
Yes, but if there is too much wealth concentration the country turns into an oligarchy. Obviously there needs to be a balance. Each country needs to find it's own balance. The Norwegians have chosen their balance. Not everyone will be happy.
- robocat 1y ago
  Fine. Is Finland an oligarchy? The article mentions 54 billion net worth left the country. I guess we'd have to look at who left to make any comments regarding startup founders or regulation manipulators. Yes, there is a balance. The default assumption is that the wealthy fuck over their countries. I'm not quite so cynical (e.g. I think Buffett is nothing like Ellison). The article is super biased (the site helps rich people get second passports). We've got a few billionaires in New Zealand. I have very little idea about their influence on our regulations (although I suspect Peter Jackson might have had a positive influence - he's certainly generally helped our economy).

chairmansteve 1y ago

Yes, but if there is too much wealth concentration the country turns into an oligarchy. Obviously there needs to be a balance. Each country needs to find it's own balance. The Norwegians have chosen their balance. Not everyone will be happy.

robocat 1y ago
Fine. Is Finland an oligarchy? The article mentions 54 billion net worth left the country. I guess we'd have to look at who left to make any comments regarding startup founders or regulation manipulators. Yes, there is a balance. The default assumption is that the wealthy fuck over their countries. I'm not quite so cynical (e.g. I think Buffett is nothing like Ellison). The article is super biased (the site helps rich people get second passports). We've got a few billionaires in New Zealand. I have very little idea about their influence on our regulations (although I suspect Peter Jackson might have had a positive influence - he's certainly generally helped our economy).