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

Ikea founder leaves fortune to no one, structures it to ensure it lasts forever

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 373 posts

Re: Ikea founder leaves fortune to no one, structures it to ensure it lasts forever

#211

Post by WorldMaker »

akuji1993 wrote: post #191
fetbaffe wrote: post #188

One have to remember why this was setup in the way it is, to protect the company forever. In Sweden during the 70-ties 80-ties the Social democrats was pushing a radical socialist agenda ('löntagarfonder') to take over companies by taxing profits and then buying shares with it, all controlled by trade unions. Result of these policies was that many companies left Sweden to protect itself (of course). IKEA, Tetra Pak a…

This sounds so obviously stupid I wonder why nobody stopped and said "You know, we might just make all these companies leave with stuff as ridiculous as this."

It doesn't sound that obviously stupid to me. It's the stock purchase plan part of a 401k, where instead of the employee/employer-match coming before taxes, it comes from taxes. Either way it's tax incented, the difference is partly semantics. Giving those shares to trade unions instead of individuals makes it more like the classic pension system than the 401k, but the concepts are similar enough that it's quite possible to see the Swedish approach here as almost a direct forerunner to the 401k.

Re: Ikea founder leaves fortune to no one, structures it to ensure it lasts forever

#212

Post by klipt »

jernfrost wrote: post #193
fetbaffe wrote: post #188

One have to remember why this was setup in the way it is, to protect the company forever. In Sweden during the 70-ties 80-ties the Social democrats was pushing a radical socialist agenda ('löntagarfonder') to take over companies by taxing profits and then buying shares with it, all controlled by trade unions. Result of these policies was that many companies left Sweden to protect itself (of course). IKEA, Tetra Pak a…

As a Norwegian I keep getting surprised by things I learn about Sweden. Sweden seems to have been a lot more socialist than Norway. In some respect might still be. The housing system in Sweden sound more socialist than what we got in Norway today, judging from how a Swedish friend has explained it to me. However welfare benefits seems more generous in Norway. How sick people are dealt with in Sweden seems harsher. No…

I guess Norway can fund more of its social benefits through oil money?

Re: Ikea founder leaves fortune to no one, structures it to ensure it lasts forever

#213

Post by JoeAltmaier »

vec wrote: post #210
akuji1993 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds so obviously stupid I wonder why nobody stopped and said "You know, we might just make all these companies leave with stuff as ridiculous as this."

A someone who is broadly sympathetic to the idea of labor ownership of the means of production, could I trouble you to explain what's so obvious about the stupidity of this plan? Taxes on corporate profits are generally seen as reasonable in the abstract, and they're common all over the world. I could see setting an unusually high tax rate being problematic, but that doesn't appear to be what happened. And it doesn't…

Labor running the company? This fails more often than it succeeds. Bread and circuses are the result, then bankruptcy. Indeed obvious without the use of hindsight.

Re: Ikea founder leaves fortune to no one, structures it to ensure it lasts forever

#214

Post by vanderZwan »

jernfrost wrote: post #199
vanderZwan wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cannot make sense of Ingvar Kamprad and IKEA without taking a moment to look at how Scandinavian culture is very different from American culture. First, we should talk about the infamous "Jantelagen": > The Law of Jante is the description of a pattern of group behaviour towards individuals within Nordic countries that negatively portrays and criticises individual success and achievement as unworthy and inappropri…

As a Norwegian who has lived in the Netherlands for 3 years, I'd say there is many similar traits there. The dutch are known as traders and business men but don't seem particularly concerned with opulence. The attitude towards public display of wealth seems very similar to the Scandinavian view. The richest man in Norway Olav Thon, has very similar behavior to Kamprad. He drives an old car, doesn't wear particularly…

I agree, the similarities are striking. For example, we have our own version of the Law of Jante, known as "maaiveldcultuur", or "mowing field culture". It refers to the expression "je moet je kop niet boven het maaiveld uitsteken", which roughly translates to "don't stick out your head above mowing height". In England this is also known as "tall poppy syndrome", and you can probably guess what it means.

> For him it seems more about the game. He loves the game of doing business and winning. It is not what you can do with money personally that matters.

Apparently, one of Kamprad's motto's was that happiness is not reaching the goal, but the journey itself. I suspect that almost all people who are outliers in their field (be that businesspeople, top athletes, anything) share this attitude. Becoming rich is an external motivation. Enjoying "the game" itself is an intrinsic one. When it comes to getting people to move mountains, the latter works much better.

Re: Ikea founder leaves fortune to no one, structures it to ensure it lasts forever

#215

Post by dopamean »

always_good wrote: post #208
justin66 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously, this takes 3 seconds to google.

Welcome to the new era, where people have smartphones in their pocket yet are less resourceful than ever.

Sometimes when you ask someone a question like "where did that quote come from" you get more than just the title of the book. Maybe they have an interesting story to retell about where they first heard it. Maybe they can give you a more personal perspective that resonates a bit more than whatever you'd find from a cursory glance at some Google search results.

Re: Ikea founder leaves fortune to no one, structures it to ensure it lasts forever

#216

Post by goty2 »

bmelton wrote: post #200
goty2 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't find that to be an apt analogy. Tax avoidance is more like abusing coupons. Someone else is effectively paying your share, but the company can't shut it down because customer would complain or it could hurt the business overall. Eventually the business is forced to raise prices and everyone deal with coupons just to get a decent deal.

Why isn't just getting rid of coupons a viable option?

Because coupons might be useful to sell overstock or introduce new products. And even if you wanted to you would either have to convince all your customers to change their habits or convince the other businesses not to also not use them. It is like with credit card fees in the US.

Re: Ikea founder leaves fortune to no one, structures it to ensure it lasts forever

#217

Post by justin66 »

zamber wrote: post #183
pc86 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And even less time not to type this meaningless and unnecessarily rude comment. My meaningless and unnecessarily rude comment, on the other hand, took quite a bit longer.

That's why I too often have that xkcd strip about people being wrong on the internet in mind _before_ writing a comment on HN. StackOverflow is for "well, actually...".

If we're being technical about it, Reddit is for comments like yours. (and this one)

Re: Ikea founder leaves fortune to no one, structures it to ensure it lasts forever

#218

Post by deadmetheny »

jacquesm wrote: post #82
piva00 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, a cheap haircut is about €20, I pay around €70 for mine in a mid-high-end salon but have seen places up to €120. I'm a man.

Get a $20 buzzer and cut it yourself. 70 euros to cut your hair is way overpriced.

Or, alternatively, just grow your hair long ;D

Re: Ikea founder leaves fortune to no one, structures it to ensure it lasts forever

#219

Post by JoeAltmaier »

dsacco wrote: post #162
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have to disagree. Laws may have something like an ethical base, but only as a nod to practicality - people have to believe in them. They are pragmatic to the core. Sure, there are ethical schools of pragmatism, and we surely include them in our ethical discussions (trolley car problems etc) but how the law lands on the trolley car is NOT any sort of arbiter of ethics?

> Sure, there are ethical schools of pragmatism, and we surely include them in our ethical discussions (trolley car problems etc) but how the law lands on the trolley car is NOT any sort of arbiter of ethics? So you’re not disagreeing then. We’re saying the same thing: legal definitions are relevant and should be included in discussion, but they do not have to be agreed with because are not intrinsically correct. I d…

Relevant to lawyers. The ethical discussion is completely possible sans any mention of regulation.

Re: Ikea founder leaves fortune to no one, structures it to ensure it lasts forever

#220

Post by always_good »

bmelton wrote: post #200
goty2 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't find that to be an apt analogy. Tax avoidance is more like abusing coupons. Someone else is effectively paying your share, but the company can't shut it down because customer would complain or it could hurt the business overall. Eventually the business is forced to raise prices and everyone deal with coupons just to get a decent deal.

Why isn't just getting rid of coupons a viable option?

Because they are political tools. Like how "getting rid of pollution" would involve rethinking our civilization, not just creating some dumpster fires.
Post reply on HN