3 ms·

I'm not Swiss, so I have no skin in the game. Therefore, I don't care who pays :-) "It's unaffordable" can certainly mean "we don't want to pay". It can also m

I'm not Swiss, so I have no skin in the game. Therefore, I don't care who pays :-) "It's unaffordable" can certainly mean "we don't want to pay". It can also mean "Are there enough rich enough people and businesses that can pay, that this can be passed, or can reasonably be collected?" It is a question of political will, and it's annoying when people lambast that question with criticism as simple selfishness. Redistribution often hits hard on middle income earners. I'll be impressed should something like this be passed, and the earning figure simply pivots on the median earner instead of gouging earnings from the middle-class. I wonder at what point Swiss high earners, or wealthy Swiss companies, will move to somewhere like Luxembourg to protect that wealth? Or is it simply not possible in the mind of a Swiss national to do so?

growupkids 13y ago
Not to mention that it also hits business, and some businesses may just choose move to markets without redistribution whereas it may not be as easy for the workers to move. That in turn hits not only the tax base once, but twice (less paid workers, less taxes from businesses).
- yaddayadda 13y ago
  But the workers that don't move will still have a basic income. Without the 'need' to immediately get new employment, those workers can take the time to train for, or create from scratch, a more fulfilling job at a company that won't pack up and relocate when social welfare is given priority over greed.
  - Zak 13y ago
    But the workers that don't move will still have a basic income. Unless/until the money runs out, which might happen more quickly than you think if, indeed companies and wealthy individuals start packing up and leaving the country.
    - growupkids 13y ago
      Exactly. The money has to come from somewhere, it's a balancing act. Set taxes too high and you lose the tax base and don't generate enough revenue (5% of 0 is still 0), set too low and you may not generate enough revenue.

growupkids 13y ago

Not to mention that it also hits business, and some businesses may just choose move to markets without redistribution whereas it may not be as easy for the workers to move. That in turn hits not only the tax base once, but twice (less paid workers, less taxes from businesses).

yaddayadda 13y ago
But the workers that don't move will still have a basic income. Without the 'need' to immediately get new employment, those workers can take the time to train for, or create from scratch, a more fulfilling job at a company that won't pack up and relocate when social welfare is given priority over greed.
- Zak 13y ago
  But the workers that don't move will still have a basic income. Unless/until the money runs out, which might happen more quickly than you think if, indeed companies and wealthy individuals start packing up and leaving the country.
  - growupkids 13y ago
    Exactly. The money has to come from somewhere, it's a balancing act. Set taxes too high and you lose the tax base and don't generate enough revenue (5% of 0 is still 0), set too low and you may not generate enough revenue.