• NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you took my comment as an endorsement of how the First republic did things, it you read it wrong.

    • silasmariner@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wow, yeah, that was a bad read lol. It’s generally received wisdom for global economics that tax disincentives push people to a point, but most of 'em will actually pay taxes if the alternative is hanging out in Bermuda forever. Nationwide rather than statewide is gonna be good enough for most

      Tl;Dr basically agree

      • PugJesus@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        but most of 'em will actually pay taxes if the alternative is hanging out in Bermuda forever.

        What if the alternative is their money hanging out in Bermuda forever while they enjoy a life of tax-reduced luxury in the countries they’re dodging taxes from?

        • silasmariner@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          Then you have to continually fight a lot of battles about your money and it gets complicated but sure that’s definitely a thing people also do and there are no magic bullets and all options for everything are a bit sucky - but having some of these mega-high-earners pay a bit more tax is still better than doing nothing because you’re worried they’ll take the money away, and the wider the policy of fair graduated tax is applied, the better it works

          • PugJesus@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            Oh, my point is more that “These cretins only pay taxes when there are teeth behind enforcement” rather than “We shouldn’t tax them more because they might leave”

            Make the IRS feared again