Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course. Your capital gains would be taxed upon sale if you didn't leave; should fleeing the country allow you to avoid that? Letting people take advantage of all the US offers while paying no tax on their growing wealth, and then letting them retire elsewhere without having put in their fair share makes no sense. Of course, we could stop taxing capital gains so favorably, as an alternative.
Even if it doesnt make sense to you, this is literally how the rest of the world works.
California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state
721–730 of 734 posts
Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state
#722Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or, alternatively, you'd need to buy a gun and defend your property yourself. Which many people do, and has become even more prevalent with the spate of looting in major cities with no police response last summer. You seem to be approaching this from a highly theoretical and ideological position, but that ignores the reality of the current situation, and the fact that the proposed law does not exist in some hypotheti…
But you're still relying on the US military to protect you from foreign nation states. Your little gun wouldn't do anything against a tank or fighter plane.
Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state
#723Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're telling yourself, "the only difference between me and Bezos" is his "privilege", and "If I had that 300k I would do the same", I think you're missing out on how important his personal choices were, and your own. If you don't see the choice factor, I think two things happen: 1) you stay where you are because you think, nobody is in fact successful, they only had it given to them, and 2) and you think it does…
Your attitude is a very good one when it comes to your own life. Taking responsibility for your own life is extremely important, and more peoe should think this way. However, when taking political and social decisions and analyzing the world around us, we must also look at how people are influenced and how their chance of success or failure is affected by conditions outside of their personal agency. The fact that we…
I think we both agree there are bonds of slavery on society, and we both agree that there are both mental bonds, and institutional bonds, and that these different types of chains require different methods of attack to free oneself (or one's group) from such. For the mental bonds, I believe an adjustment of perspective is all that's needed to free myself, and for the systemic bonds, I think you believe that collective action and organizing is how groups free themselves. I think we simply differ in thinking the degree of importance and effect of each of these. I think the mental bonds are more prevalent, and I believe you feel the systemic bonds are.
Not that it's really important that we agree, or not, but it's nice to draw the outlines clearly I think. And we can both be right, I believe, as there are different situations where mental or systemic bonds are more prevalent, not that "both right" is the most important thing either. I think it's just important that each of us enjoys the beliefs we choose to have.
I also feel that collective action and "asking the system" to change is a position of powerlessnes, and futility. Perhaps you feel the same way about trying to adjust your perspective, in order to free yourself.
The final things I'll say about all this is: 1) I want no part in the social-political "battles" of this age. The ideas in these battles are not my ideas, and I don't really understand them (not the ones that I speak of here, but the majority of the ideas in currency in the "culture wars") even as I watch myself partaking in that discourse and using the language of it, and I don't want to become an instrument of the will of whoever's ideas these are. And 2) I think privilege, in its common contemporary usage, is a made-up, woolly concept that muddies the waters and is not a useful lens to address either mental nor institutional bonds.
The reasons are, first because privilege lumps together unrelated things: advantages, and special rights and immunities, granted or available to only some. If I have special rights and immunities over others, that's the definition of unfair. It's a real thing, like diplomatic privilege, but it's rare on the whole. Advantage is much more common, like money, genetics, country, family. I am advantaged, but I'm not privileged. But such a distinction and nuance has become verboten in the current fascist doublethink speech controlled discourse. The term privilege as used lumps together these distinct things. Second, "privilege" is a way to pretend someone is your enemy and justify attacking them, by conflating whatever advantages they may have been given or have earned, with the made up concept of them having special rights and immunities over others. And if one is so independent to "resist" this "group judgement" you, the "tolerant and inclusive" group decries you are "privilege blind", and therefor doubly guilty. So in its common usage, it's a made up concept, that has no basis in reality, and is simply abused, in the vein of terrorism, to create enemies and spread fear and shame. Third, privilege elides over the importance of personal responsibility, and captivates people with the compelling, but false, fantasy that "it's never your fault", which traps people in a powerless cycle of fake victimhood, learned helplessness and hostility towards others acted out via blame displacement. It teaches people that the way to deal with their frustrations is to blame someone else, instead of reflecting and creating improvements. This is such an addictive thing to do, it is misused. Of course, "privilege" is not the only tool in the arsenal of social control that contributes to these maladies, but it is one of them. In short, I denounce "the contemporary concept of privilege" as part of the mental enslavement of people that traps them, under the guise of freeing them.
I want to share more of my story. I'm advantaged, but not privileged. Some of those advantages I earned (most, these days), for example the experiences I've given myself that were broader than my upbringing, and my skills and critical thinking abilities, and some were given to me, for example, I came from a rich background, which is an advantage, because even tho I earned scholarships to school and college, my parents could pay, and I never had a lack of money or shelter, until my early 20s, when, deciding that my advantaged background was also a disadvantage (rich family was also abusive, comfortable life was also narrow: completely heterosexual all boys school, life in the suburbs in a Western country, and so on), I gave myself all types of new experiences over many years that were broader that where I came from, because I knew there was more to the world, and I knew I wanted to be more, than where I came from. And I wanted to make sure that what I was choosing, or wasn't, was not due to the conditioning of my narrow upbringing, but was authentically me. So for me, it wasn't only about what I was given, it was what I chose to do with it, with which I created the life I wanted. I followed the mantra, "follow my heart", and "use what I have to get what I want," and figured out ways to travel and live overseas, even tho my parents didn't support that. After years of trying to get them to "understand" me, at some point in my mid-20s I simply realized that my parents were not "in my way", that the only thing stopping me from doing the life I wanted was myself, and that (if I cared, or conceptually if one were to honor the idea of the best wishes of "good parents") then the best way to honor my parents was to do what would make myself happy, and be truly fulfilling, because no matter what they might say, why would they really want anything else for me? And if they did want me to simply only suffer as they felt they had themselves, then why should I care what they think? So, either way, I could free myself of this one, small, but for a time, very significant bond, by adjusting my perspective.
My parents, my school, even my peers were always focused on money, getting a job, a career, getting married, all of the normal things (even, bizarrely, as they tried to get me to stop computer programming because they saw it as a "waste of time"). I just thought, I don't want to be stuck in one path, and it scared me I think to see everyone of my peers enthusiastically (leap off that cliff) go down that road. And the more "alternative" people I came across in my journey I could never felt really aligned (as interesting and valuable as there company was to me) because they seemed too crazy, or too far gone, and I knew I wasn't like that, either.
I wanted to know how could I ever decide what I was going to do with my life, my one valuable life, if I didn't understand myself and didn't understand the world? So I set out to understand my own limits, and the limits of the world, and I did that, and then figured out what I wanted to do (at least to a first approximation, or for this stage in my life). And even through the long years since my mid-20s I've held true to my vision of following the life I want to do, and the biggest lesson I've had is, "always back yourself and trust your instincts and stand up for that." Even tho I learned that lesson early on, it's been the times where I have not done so, that have been most painful to me. Sure, there's been many others things I've had to learn, very important, but that has been one, central theme. Follow the path I want for myself. No matter what. And tell my own story, don't let anyone tell it for me.
Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state
#724Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. How else would it get to his bank account? If he didn't create it, why people sent it to him? He stole it?
Profits are just unpaid wages. He bought labor for less than it was worth and pocketed the excess.
Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state
#725Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just acknowledge the reality that all these "self made millionaires/billionaires", in literally every instance I've ever seen, recieve massive handouts from parents/uncles etc. that I would have never gotten from mine. Probably his entire childhood includes random things like private piano lessons at the critical young age for maximal value, which I obviously did not receive. I'm already pretty successful relative…
I just feel very sad for you that you feel that way, because you don't believe you can get it unless you get given this thing first. About personal responsibility and choices, if you don't believe that then that's not something you can benefit from. I'm not giving you advice, it's your path not mine, and I don't want the karma nor responsibility for affecting yours, I'm simply sharing my feelings about these things.…
It would be completely idiotic if someone beat me in a marathon by starting on the last mile and then I look at that then say to myself "hmmm, I guess that guy just runs really fast."
Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state
#726Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just feel very sad for you that you feel that way, because you don't believe you can get it unless you get given this thing first. About personal responsibility and choices, if you don't believe that then that's not something you can benefit from. I'm not giving you advice, it's your path not mine, and I don't want the karma nor responsibility for affecting yours, I'm simply sharing my feelings about these things.…
"Jeff Bezos received massive handouts" is not a feeling or a personal choice. It's a fact. I live in a fact based reality. I can't glean any meaning or value from your paragraphs of rambling about feelings. It would be completely idiotic if someone beat me in a marathon by starting on the last mile and then I look at that then say to myself "hmmm, I guess that guy just runs really fast."
Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state
#727Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Welcome to American politics. What does this non-sequitur have to do with anything written so far? With you alluding to be a liberal, you've just proven that racism transcends American politics of left and right. > I hate racists too which is why I prefer not having them in my state. I am sorry that somewhere along the way you were hurt so much that it would push you to blame all of your misfortunes on another race…
Liberal by definition is anti-racist. A major tenet of liberalism is egalitarianism and it's what allows free market capitalism. Maybe you should go educate yourself about what Liberalism is before appointing yourself the racism police on Hackernews. I'm a liberal and I've said I prefer not having more racists in California with illiberal sentiment. That is the opposite of racist. There is a long history of America e…
1. Just because you feel that you're liberal does not mean that you are actually a liberal.
2. You can identify as a liberal and still be a racist. e.g. your ideals of "egalitarianism" only seem to apply to you fellow "Californios" and no one else
> Maybe you should go educate yourself about what Liberalism is before appointing yourself the racism police on Hackernews.
I've already proven based on your comments alone that you hold racist views. Let me remind you the definition of a racist again, since you keep forgetting and ignoring it.
racist - a person who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group with the belief that groups of humans possess different behavioral traits corresponding to physical appearance
How do you not fit the definition of a racist based on your previous comments? Let me remind you that your very first comment for me was essentially, "Leave my home, it only belongs to my people (who are racially / ethnically similar to me)". How is that much different from "Go back to your own country?"
Maybe we should have HN decide who is right and who is wrong? Your views do not belong here.
> There is a long history of America enforcing white racial integrity which you seem to be naive to. As a native Californian I think it's fair to be weary.
You're not wrong that America has a long history of racism in favor of white Anglos. I'm not disputing that. However, I think you're the one who needs a history lesson, instead of believing in your revisionist version. While the Calfornios were mixed, being multi-generational descendants of both conquistadors and indigenous people, they were by and large culturally still the same as their conquistador ancestors. They served European royalty to take and subvert land and native peoples for the Spanish crown by any means necessary. The first Calfornios were soldiers. All of this is well documented.
"Spanish and Mexican rule were devastating for native populations. 'As the missions grew, California’s native population of Indians began a catastrophic decline.' Gregory Orfalea estimates that pre-contact population was reduced by 33% during the Spanish and Mexican regimes. Most of the deaths stemmed from imported diseases and the disruption of traditional ways of life, but violence was common, and some historians have charged that life in the missions was close to slavery."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_genocide
The Spanish conquistadors' descendants were no better than their English counterparts when it came to colonization and brutality. "Californios" are also not the same people as California's native population.
> I stand by not wanting more transplants in my state and it's not just me.
The popularity of a belief does not guarantee that it's actually moral or ethical. Your views are not acceptable on HN and they do not belong on HN.
Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state
#728Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If I start a company and it gets valued at 30 million dollars, why should the government be allowed to force me to sell my company to pay their wealth tax? I don't know the specifics of this proposal. But I live in a country that has a similar wealth tax, and it doesn't work that way here. When you found a company, its shares remain valued at nominal value for tax purposes, until you sell or transfer them. Only aft…
That is capital gains tax. Not a wealth tax.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_Netherlands#We...
Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state
#729Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Welcome to American politics. What does this non-sequitur have to do with anything written so far? With you alluding to be a liberal, you've just proven that racism transcends American politics of left and right. > I hate racists too which is why I prefer not having them in my state. I am sorry that somewhere along the way you were hurt so much that it would push you to blame all of your misfortunes on another race…
Liberal by definition is anti-racist. A major tenet of liberalism is egalitarianism and it's what allows free market capitalism. Maybe you should go educate yourself about what Liberalism is before appointing yourself the racism police on Hackernews. I'm a liberal and I've said I prefer not having more racists in California with illiberal sentiment. That is the opposite of racist. There is a long history of America e…
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.
Re: California plan for wealth tax on anyone who spends 60 days a year in the state
#730Earlier quoted context omitted.
Liberal by definition is anti-racist. A major tenet of liberalism is egalitarianism and it's what allows free market capitalism. Maybe you should go educate yourself about what Liberalism is before appointing yourself the racism police on Hackernews. I'm a liberal and I've said I prefer not having more racists in California with illiberal sentiment. That is the opposite of racist. There is a long history of America e…
> Liberal by definition is anti-racist. 1. Just because you feel that you're liberal does not mean that you are actually a liberal. 2. You can identify as a liberal and still be a racist. e.g. your ideals of "egalitarianism" only seem to apply to you fellow "Californios" and no one else > Maybe you should go educate yourself about what Liberalism is before appointing yourself the racism police on Hackernews. I've alr…
The place this thread really went off the rails is https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25482753. Your first comment was obviously in good faith, but when you got an obviously bad faith reply, you should not have fed it. This is in the site guidelines: "Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead." When flames aren't fed, they quickly die out.