Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Norweigan oil fund

nbim.no

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 339 posts

Re: Norweigan oil fund

#111

Post by Majromax »

michaeljohansen wrote: post #48
BluffFace wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps this is why they can afford many government programs that the US simply cannot. Without a prolific income stream comparable to Norwegian oil, the only way to provide more social services is to tax individuals and businesses harder. Tax any group too heavily and you create brain drain, which hurts in the long run.

Norwegian software developer here. I pay my taxes with pleasure, knowing that the money supported my education, my ability to go to the hospital, good roads, good airports, and lots of other public functions that are great because we collectively invest in them. I think anything below 20% in taxes simply means a country's public functions will suffer. It's weird to me that Americans have so much against taxes. If a c…

> I think anything below 20% in taxes simply means a country's public functions will suffer.

Honestly, the biggest difference between nations isn't so much in income/payroll taxes, but in the VAT. The US simply doesn't have one at the federal level, and state sales taxes are typically in the neighbourhood of 6% (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sales_taxes_in_the_United_Stat...).

Re: Norweigan oil fund

#112

Post by slowhand09 »

michaeljohansen wrote: post #48
BluffFace wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps this is why they can afford many government programs that the US simply cannot. Without a prolific income stream comparable to Norwegian oil, the only way to provide more social services is to tax individuals and businesses harder. Tax any group too heavily and you create brain drain, which hurts in the long run.

Norwegian software developer here. I pay my taxes with pleasure, knowing that the money supported my education, my ability to go to the hospital, good roads, good airports, and lots of other public functions that are great because we collectively invest in them. I think anything below 20% in taxes simply means a country's public functions will suffer. It's weird to me that Americans have so much against taxes. If a c…

American here. I have no problem paying taxes. I just hate to see my tax dollars mismanaged. Baltimore MD has been in the news lately, largely as people have focused on a certain public official's tweets. Baltimore receives a huge amount of taxpayer dollars, federal, state, and local. Its per pupil school spending is by far the highest in the state. The percentage of public secondary school students who demonstrate proficiency in mathematics is less than 1%. 2 of its last 3 city mayors have resigned due to corruption charges. I consider this mismanagement.

Re: Norweigan oil fund

#113

Post by harryh »

millettjon wrote: post #97
harryh wrote: post #75

Some points of comparison. - CalPERS[1] has about $360 billion in assets under management. - The US Social Security Trust fund (which, depending on your POV you might count as an accounting fiction) is about $2.9 trillion. - Vanguard has about $5.3 trillion in AUM. 1. California Public Employees' Retirement System

How many employees does this cover? California has almost 40 million people. Norway has about 5.3 million.

~1.6 million employees + their families for CalPERS

Re: Norweigan oil fund

#114

Post by sp332 »

atemerev wrote: post #52
lr4444lr wrote: post #34

The Norwegian success is the single biggest piece of evidence as to why the Venezuelan catastrophe was largely avoidable, and the fault of irresponsible leadership.

Of course it was avoidable. Just should have kept capitalism.

How does capitalism decide who gets extraction rights for natural resources?

Re: Norweigan oil fund

#115

Post by ekr »

lnsru wrote: post #28

Wow! These people must be extraordinary to use oil money this way! Not kidding! Never been in Norway, but in countries I have ever been this would be barely possible due to corruption and the needs of the politician’s buddies. Like yachts, private jets, Bentleys and Vertu phones. This $186k/person isn’t far from what average German poses: https://www.bundesbank.de/resource/blob/617492/cd59713c156ad...

Farouk al-Kasim is the Iraqi who is said to have played a big role in this outcome. I believe his story has been on HN before: https://www.ft.com/content/99680a04-92a0-11de-b63b-00144feab...

Re: Norweigan oil fund

#116

Post by dcbadacd »

cheeky78 wrote: post #95
philip1209 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fund started with oil money, but now focuses new investments on renewable energy sources: https://www.wsj.com/articles/norways-sovereign-wealth-fund-b...

Yes, but it's based on oil, which is contributing to climate change..and not 100% is not used for renewable energy, so it's a net negative. It's strange to me that people aren't protesting and complaining about this fund, when it's a big issue for future.

Oil isn't going anywhere soon, this is the least evil thing you can do and we should do so with all oil money.

Re: Norweigan oil fund

#117

Post by buboard »

Emma_Goldman wrote: post #61
panpanna wrote: post #14

> On average, the fund holds 1.4 percent of all of the world’s listed companies. Why fund businesses in other countires? Shouldn't Norway try to set up some more industries at home? Everyone claim Europe (was: EU) needs more VC funding to stop the brain drain. Well, here is a huge pool of money just waiting to be spent

I'm from the UK and I've never heard of anyone talk of 'brain drain' as a problem. I think you may be generalising from the tech sector.

Brain drain is very real in the european south. The UK is the sink where all this drain ends up thats why you don't hear about it.

Re: Norweigan oil fund

#118

Post by spamizbad »

coliveira wrote: post #56
lr4444lr wrote: post #34

The Norwegian success is the single biggest piece of evidence as to why the Venezuelan catastrophe was largely avoidable, and the fault of irresponsible leadership.

But what to say about Americans, who squandered natural resources to help the rich, and now the funding to their own social security is en route to insolvency?

America should seriously consider nationalizing its resources and using that money to either fund programs to reverse the trend of its declining life expectancy or at the very least reduce the deficit (and perhaps, one day, bootstrap a sovereign wealth fund of its own)

Re: Norweigan oil fund

#119

Post by myth_drannon »

Scoundreller wrote: post #82
ceejayoz wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US produces 10x the oil Norway does, and was producing significant amounts of oil as far back as the 1860s. We've had that profit stream, we just let it get captured by private corporations (or in Alaska's case, given away to garner votes).

I do wonder if Canada could have been like Norway for the same reasons. And Canada has more than just oil. But a lot of it seems to be privately squandered.

Alberta has one - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberta_Heritage_Savings_Trust...

Re: Norweigan oil fund

#120

Post by dorfsmay »

Think hard about it, would you rather your government do something like this, or get a cheque every year like in Alaska (or right before an election in Alberta)?
Post reply on HN