Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
It's funny that people keep forgetting wealth is tied to assets
Most valuable assets can't really move
The rich typically live near their assets so they can keep a finger on the politics around them
Tax those assets and if they want to dodge the tax, they have to give up the asset we want anyway
They.
Can't.
Just.
Run.
They absolutely could run, whether that means selling their property, hiring people to manage them (they already do that), or whatever other way to facilitate leaving.
They can leave, and they can afford to leave and live almost anywhere else for cheaper.
They just don't want to.
It's an important distinction because it highlights the truth about every future argument the wealthy make: they'll yell and cry and say it'll be disasterous, and then nothing happens.
But your comment isn't correct in any way, I guess people just up voted it because they agree with the spirit of it?
This is it right here. They like NYC because NYC is a nice place to live. They didn't even feel the money they lost funding campaigns against Mamdani that spread the wealth flight narrative, and they won't feel the modest tax increases Mamdani is seeking either.
The OC feels good, but yours sounds correct.
They just don't want to.
Because they can't
If you've ever heard a "wealthy" person say otherwise, you're talking to a deluded clown.
30 families own over half of the UK
Those assets are not mobile
Edit: not 30 families, but the much more reasonable number of 50. More detail below
What are you even on about?
You legitimately think wealthy people can never move cities because they have to personally be there to overseas the buildings they own? And that all wealthy people own a bunch of buildings, but only in the city (not just state) they live in?
Like, there is just so much that seems to need to be explained here...
...
No, of course they can move, they typically have a lot of money, they physically go where they like.
Their assets can't though, and if you look at anyone who owns a majority of assets in a given country, they typically do everything they can to put their weight on the government there
And, of course, they typically have to be a citizen of said country, where they pay tax. (Or if you're American, you just pay tax regardless of where you are, because fuck you, apparently freedom isn't free—not a yank btw, just have some mates that suffer this particular pain)
We're not talking about the kind of rich guy most people immediately think of: high income & flashy wankers,
We're talking about the literal handful of bastards that are breaking the world economy right now by simply existing.
Ultimately they own ground and stuff on that ground. Maybe via middlemen (and currently a shitload of vibes), but wealth ultimately comes from assets.
None of that is practically moveable
Even literal gold bars are really hard to move across borders in any kind of quantity
All of that is what ultra wealth really is, and in every real sense, only that is wealth in a capitalist economy. Everything else is an abstraction over a physical asset or just negligible.
The percentage of wealth owned by he ultra wealthy is on the rise. That means the percentage of wealth for literally everyone else is shrinking.
You wanna know how we can watch that happen? Just wait. You'll be able to tell we're fucked if the prices of assets (like, idk, houses) go up quicker than the average person's pay
...... Wait..... Fuck.
Edit: tbf I was too pessimistic in my previous comment, it's not 30 families, it's actually 50, so I'm glad we're actually living in such an egalitarian society
Does the same apply if you just move across US states instead of countries, or even better, just move to another NY city or the nearby Jersey City? What exactly is so difficult to move?
Yeah; that makes sense, to me. Afterall, What’s the point of being rich if you can’t live where you want.
I mean I upvoted you because of your wicked username, so sue me
Most valuable assets can’t really move
The very rich don't hold a very large percentage of their weath in immobile form. More in investments of various sorts.
And those assets ultimately are tied to something physical.
We're talking about the ultra rich, not just your average lucky rich guy earning a big paycheck
If hypothetical tax fleeing rich guy has £5bn invested in some American company and they are running from a tax on that asset, what do they do? They have to sell off the asset to someone who wants it (good) or they still face the tax (especially in America where uncle Sam will follow you to the end of the earth to get your tax bill).
Imagine they manage that and don't make too much of a loss doing so (which is already not realistic, but anyway). Now what do they do with that? Keeping cash as cash is basically flushing money down the drain, so they need to quickly reinvest it in something roughly as financially performant as what it was in before. Problem is if they are a rational investor, their money was already in the best place so wherever it goes next basically has to be a compromise.
The ultra rich are a different breed to what you're thinking of, even their market investments are big enough it's generally pretty hard to move them between borders for the purposes of avoiding tax
You are missing the point of this specific scaremongering. Nobody ever said the ultra rich would leave the US if he won. They said (just like the headline and article state clearly) the rich would leave the city, going to FL and TX. It is QUITE easy to keep all your market investments and corporations and even your real estate holdings while living in another state, or heck, even another city within NY.
Your argument makes sense when talking about the federal government implementing a wealth tax, but it doesn't have much to do with a city raising taxes. The rich are going to stay in NYC because it's a great city to live in if you are rich, though it isn't where I want to live if I were poor or even as an upper middle class person. The regular wealthy people have houses in multiple cities in their country and will live in the city they enjoy living in. The ultra rich have houses in multiple countries, but they will still choose where they spend most of their time based on where they like spending most of their time.
It feels to me like staying in New York City as taxes rise on the hyper-rich would be the ultimate flex. You're so wealthy you can't even be bothered to notice the plebs have raised taxes on you.
Some marketing team needs to get working on this angle, lol.
Fun fact in ancient Athens only the rich payed taxes because it was seen as both a flex and civic duty, since if you had enough money to qualify it meant you were doing very good.
Also was a good way to not go the way of the tyrant.
Can we go back to using the dirty money in donations to build libraries and improving educational systems instead of each billionaire hyping the next hyper surveillance platform and hallucinating aggregators?
They DID go the way of the tyrant a few times. And when they had a democracy they were a slave society that headed up an "alliance" of city-states that was essentially an empire and protection racket. Athens is cool and all but deeply flawed too.
This is basically what they did in feudal Japan.
Like, a potential rival that lives near your capital, is given the opportunity to pay for the development of a massive wall to protect it, along with bragging rights that they're powerful enough to help the city, and that they have close ties with leadership as an ally
This drains them of capital they could use to raise an army, and also installs a big fortification that makes it harder to attack.
What?
Everyone wealthy enough to pay those taxes can afford to pay those taxes.
Saying they can't is a lie to the non-wealthy. And I honestly didn't think anyone was naive enough to fall for that.
But apparently you all really thought the richest people in NYC were gonna have to leave due to taxes?
The wealthy will remain the wealthy one way or the other. The only difference is whether they imagine themselves as becoming poorer or if they imagine themselves as being high status.
Either way it will be the same people. The question is whether you can manufacture consent.
Curious how soon we would expect to see signs of an exodus if there were one? I'm all for dunking on conservatives but I imagine it takes a little longer than a month to put moves like that in place. Plus he's not even mayor yet so he couldn't have any direct impact on the city.
Yes, it's way too early for articles like this.
You mean the propaganda to convince the middle class they're just temporarily embarrassed billionaires that will rise to the top with upper class tax cuts?
God I remember when the phrase was temporarily embarrassed millionaire... most people's incomes haven't risen that much in decades and being a millionaire is a nothing burger.
Appreciation of a home and a healthy retirement fund can easily be over a million, so I opted to bump it to billionaire because decamillionaire isn't as clean. But I guess $1 million is still out of reach for the majority of the US population so it could still be temporarily-embarrassed millionaire all the same. Yet again, it's the billionaire class convincing the decathousandaires the tax cuts for the ultra rich will make them more money
Be lot cooler if they did.
Capital flight scaremongering again
It's the same threat as a 5 year old threatening to hold their breath until they die if they don't get their way.
How disappointing.
In related news, my dog didn't die of loneliness after worming treatment.
Hopefully, other places learn from this. Taxing billionaires properly will hardly send them running. And once all the interesting places have learned that most of the notorious tax evaders don't run, the few that run will run out of hiding places.
It has been a while and someone else can go look up the interview but Warren Buffet put this type of argument to rest decades ago. Never in any of his calculations was he concerned about the tax implications of his investments. The tax shit comes later.
People are not passing on investments because the taxes will be too much that is straight idiotic. I'm not going to take this 20% return on my investment with little to no risk because the gov't will want to tax my 20% gain? Think about it for one second.
Also the wealthy aren't going to leave New York City it has too much culture, financial wealth, and power for that to make any type of sense.
They always say they will but never do.
No shit. Everyone wants to live in a civilized society... It's obviously better
Has he raised taxes yet though?
Not that I expect it to make a difference, but it's a bit premature to claim victory if not.
He doesn't even officially become mayor until January.
People act like he won be primary and became God king. And then won the general and became double God king.
Of course they aren’t. Because he’s not a threat.