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

Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 393 posts

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#71

Post by cmh89 »

pyuser583 wrote: post #48
nradov wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed there is nothing stopping workers from organizing across borders, even if individual workers are only legally authorized to work in one country. Many labor unions have local chapters in multiple countries and can coordinate labor actions. For example, see the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers which operates in the USA and Canada.

It’s tricky. American unions avoid coordinating with their American counterparts because of corruption. Unions have a very specific set of rules to play by, and these rules are different for each country.

>Unions have a very specific set of rules to play by, and these rules are different for each country.

The rules unions have to play by were put in place to reduce their power to effectively organize.

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#72

Post by DoneWithAllThat »

bell-cot wrote: post #41

Wow. Is Bloomberg actually a credible business publication? Barring a serious housing surplus, or similar major economic problems, there are ~no upsides for political leaders who actually work to attract more residents to an area. (Attracting more & higher bidders, for the limited housing stock, is a different story.) Vs. "attracting new business"? That attracts plenty of favorable press, bragging rights, etc. And fo…

To answer your opening question: no, Bloomberg has not been a credible business publication for some time. They’re one of the legacy publications that used their name recognition and reputation as a springboard to essentially a paid op-Ed publication - authors pay them to have their opinion pieces published. See also: Newsweek.

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#73

Post by notch898a »

FpUser wrote: post #38
vorpalhex wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans stopped being migratory about 12,000 years ago. You probably don't want criminals to freely move into your country. You probably want a country that gets funded by taxes (both short term and long term). No country in the world maintains open borders. Everytime there has been mass unorganized migration it has been a humanitarian disaster. Platitudes only work on paper.

>"Humans stopped being migratory about 12,000 years ago" Up until recently ( relatively ) a person could pretty much move to other country without much fuzz.

You still can in Argentina and Paraguay.

Paraguay up until recently required a ~5k deposit but they dropped even that. In Argentina "technically" you're supposed to follow a bunch of rather restrictive resident visa pathways but few do that and you can file for citizenship immediately upon landing and until your case is finished cannot be deported. The requirements are basically live there for 2 years and show you had some income, but by judge shopping some allow black market income lol.

Others of note: Bolivia and Somaliland only require a token payment for a 1 year resident visa (think in Bolivia you only need do that 2 or 3 times to become PR or citizen). If you have a bit more cash several places like honduras / nicoragua / ecuador only require ~30k "investment" which is basically accessible (eventually) to anyone middle class+ with enough determination. When I went to Rojava they also accept basically anyone as they are a "people without a nation" who happen to have sort of a nation.

And then there's weev, who posts here on occasion. I think he got a Transnistria passport, which is obtainable after only a year of residence. It's my understanding residency is as easy as going to a hotel and asking to talk to the right people about getting a resident permit, and paying some moderate fees.

If you're not too discriminating pretty much anyone can emigrate from the US forever with very little capital.

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#74

Post by ch4s3 »

alexfromapex wrote: post #65

The only way to make it happen is to incentivize it monetarily. That means the government’s budget would have to be heavily controlled by how many residents there are. But just residency is too narrow of a lens to make any conclusions from, in my opinion.

Not necessarily. Making it easier to build housing or creating temporary tax abatements for renovations is a tired and true strategy that doesn't really cost a city anything. Attracting new residents to rehab and move into formerly run down housing will actually increase tax receipts in the medium term.

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#75

Post by mattkrause »

DoneWithAllThat wrote: post #72
bell-cot wrote: post #41

Wow. Is Bloomberg actually a credible business publication? Barring a serious housing surplus, or similar major economic problems, there are ~no upsides for political leaders who actually work to attract more residents to an area. (Attracting more & higher bidders, for the limited housing stock, is a different story.) Vs. "attracting new business"? That attracts plenty of favorable press, bragging rights, etc. And fo…

To answer your opening question: no, Bloomberg has not been a credible business publication for some time. They’re one of the legacy publications that used their name recognition and reputation as a springboard to essentially a paid op-Ed publication - authors pay them to have their opinion pieces published. See also: Newsweek.

FWIW, I've always found Matt Levine's "Money Stuff" column to be funny and informative.

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#76

Post by [deleted] »

NovemberWhiskey wrote: post #68
abvdasker wrote: post #56

It's worth remembering that New York-based opposition to subsidies for Amazon's construction of "HQ2" in Long Island City was widely vilified and disparaged in mainstream media outlets across the political spectrum. This latest development looks like a pretty strong vindication of those who were outspoken against these tax handouts to Amazon.

The specific tax incentives offered to Amazon (above and beyond the programs that the city offers broadly) were all linked to job creation. Create no jobs; get no tax breaks. With that in mind, to what extent do you consider this a "vindication"?

[deleted]

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#77

Post by nhchris »

ErikVandeWater wrote: post #64
nhchris wrote: post #15

The article is valid in speaking specifically about US states competing, but otherwise I find the idea of treating governments, and countries, as mere economic platforms, that compete like a business would, disturbing. They are representatives of their nations, and their duty is to their people, to whom they are guardians, of said people and their homelands. They should not be 'competing' for more residents just as f…

Whether something is disturbing or not doesn't say much about whether it's a good idea, just that it is different from the conventional. Around the world, governments act like abusive parents. If people could migrate freely (creating a competition for residents), much more people would live without the abuse of authoritarian governments.

Governments don't come from the geography, but the people. Living in a small country myself, a place such as China, India, Indonesia, or Nigeria could send (and they would gladly come) enough people to outvote us on any issue 3x over, without even noticing they're missing anyone. We would simply cease to exist first as a sovereign people, and soon after as a distinct people at all, without any territory to call our own.

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#78

Post by throwaway6734 »

mattkrause wrote: post #75
DoneWithAllThat wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To answer your opening question: no, Bloomberg has not been a credible business publication for some time. They’re one of the legacy publications that used their name recognition and reputation as a springboard to essentially a paid op-Ed publication - authors pay them to have their opinion pieces published. See also: Newsweek.

FWIW, I've always found Matt Levine's "Money Stuff" column to be funny and informative.

Odd lots is an amazing podcast as well

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#79

Post by somewhereoutth »

cyclecount wrote: post #6

This line of thinking comes up often on HN but it ignores the central reason for governments to enact borders, a rather modern invention. Governments (at the behest of businesses) enforce borders so that labor cannot effectively organise. A border exists often for workers only, but is mostly a legal fiction that corporations can easily navigate. The most common example for the Americans reading this is NAFTA, which m…

Which is why the EU single market has free movement of workers as one of its 4 central pillars.

A major sticking point with Brexit - the UK wanted to be in the market without worker free movement (because immigrants)

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#80

Post by gameman144 »

candiddevmike wrote: post #36
gameman144 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rates are vastly different though,no? If I have a leaky faucet, it seems strange to say "This faucet is useless: the water is getting through anyway, and this way I'm having to pay for new gaskets!"

I don't think your example is valid because we're not talking about water, we're talking about humans who are choosing to leave their country for a better place. Pursuit of happiness and all that jazz. I guess my opinion is being born in a place like the US shouldn't be some kind of privilege, and instead we should strive for the US to be a bastion for human dignity.

> we're talking about humans who are choosing to leave their country for a better place.

What makes the US a better place? What keeps other countries from being a better place?

Post reply on HN