Live data from Hacker News

Why I’m Investing $500M in Migrants

wsj.com

71–80 of 83 posts

Re: Why I’m Investing $500M in Migrants

#71
post #10

"I will invest in startups, established companies, social-impact initiatives and businesses founded by migrants and refugees themselves." Delusion pro! Sure there will be talented people, but they'll find a way, it's still nice they'll get help getting funded, but what about the masses who come for social benefits, and don't really wish to work during their lifetime. Not to mention the lack of single f*ck they give a…

$500M wouldn't last very long if you had to split it among the masses. It's easy for Soros et al to support mass immigration if they aren't the ones who bear the cost.

Re: Why I’m Investing $500M in Migrants

#72
post #57
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then change the tax laws. It's silly to suggest that they should pay more to the government than is legally required. Actual tax evasion comes with pretty serious penalties, so people with loads of money tend to be pretty prudent when ensuring what they are doing with their taxes is legal.

I agree that changing tax law would be the best remedy but I'm not entirely sure if tax "avoidance" on a massive scale doesn't have some ethical considerations. When the people engaging in said avoidance have an outsized influence on the way tax laws are set up and interpreted relative to working/middle class citizens, I can certainly understand why some might attach an ethical consideration to such schemes. Just to…

>I agree that changing tax law would be the best remedy but I'm not entirely sure if tax "avoidance" on a massive scale doesn't have some ethical considerations.

Do you suggest that people are unethical if they choose to take a mortgage interest deduction or deduct business expenses? How about people that rollover their retirement accounts?

I disagree with the tax benefits granted to homeowners and parents. However, it is the current law and I don't rant that people are being unethical by limiting their payment to the government under the law that exists. I would consider them fiscally irresponsible to do otherwise.

Re: Why I’m Investing $500M in Migrants

#73

Have no knowledge of Mr. Soros' policies or public stance on issues, but I ask: why is there even a need for a separate fund for migrants? From what I know, investors are driven by profit, not be ethnicity. If a business has potential to turn a profit, I don't think any VC would want to turn away. At least that's how things work for some of my Indian friends in the Valley. No one has ever denied them investment becau…

It only makes sense from a PR stand point: Drawing attention to the far outliers at the top. On a cognitive level, we all know that migrants are people not entirely unlike ourselves, capable of a wide range emotion sand behaviors, but what the news would organically expose us to are the outliers at the bottom - rapists, terrorists, organized crime. By creating this fund, Soros is trying to steer the conversation towards the top outliers, the innovators and job creators.

Re: Why I’m Investing $500M in Migrants

#74
post #70

On a slight tangent here... I've always thought one of the biggest problems with globalisation as a concept is the absence of free movement of people. What I mean by that is the ability of people anywhere to move anywhere else, to work, consume, pay tax, and otherwise take part in civic life, for as long as they wish. We have free movement of capital and free movement of goods. However the limitation on movement of l…

Some cultures are more aggressive than others and do not allow for the free exchange of ideas. This is why this does not always work. The freedoms provided by western culture are fragile, a monopoly over a democracy can result in an antidemocratic anti-free society, one where the benefits of free anything are extinguished.

Re: Why I’m Investing $500M in Migrants

#75
post #72
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that changing tax law would be the best remedy but I'm not entirely sure if tax "avoidance" on a massive scale doesn't have some ethical considerations. When the people engaging in said avoidance have an outsized influence on the way tax laws are set up and interpreted relative to working/middle class citizens, I can certainly understand why some might attach an ethical consideration to such schemes. Just to…

>I agree that changing tax law would be the best remedy but I'm not entirely sure if tax "avoidance" on a massive scale doesn't have some ethical considerations. Do you suggest that people are unethical if they choose to take a mortgage interest deduction or deduct business expenses? How about people that rollover their retirement accounts? I disagree with the tax benefits granted to homeowners and parents. However,…

While I too disagree with some of the tax benefits afforded to homeowners, particularly with regard to long time homeowners here in CA, no, I would not consider that unethical. For one, there are probably more homeowners and parents than billionaires, so if they vote to give themselves certain tax breaks, even if I happen to disagree with them, I don't view it as a "corruption" of democracy. I'm sorry for using the word "corruption", it might not really be appropriate but I'm tired and couldn't think of a better term. At the very least, politicians seem to be pretty straightforward regarding tax breaks for homeowners, the process of taxation and financial lawmaking seems significantly more opaque to me. I view tax avoidance on the scale of hundreds of millions, or billions of dollars, differently than tax avoidance on a much smaller scale, even if both are perfectly legal. I admit this may not be a very good way of looking at things but I can't help but feel that scale is important here.

I hope my posts didn't come off as a "rant", that was not my intention and I deliberately tried to make sure to point out that I'm not concrete in some of these views. I like coming to HN largely because ideas can be challenged in a respectful manner, I apologize if my posts came off as rants.

Re: Why I’m Investing $500M in Migrants

#76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen a Syrian immigrant attempt to sexually assault a women with my own eyes. You should stay in your ivory tower if you want to be able to maintain your delusions.

I hope you physically stopped the violent attack, took the perpetrator to the police and pressed charges. Rape is a violent and sickening crime - that happens and is under prosecuted in every country, committed by native (men) as well as immigrant (men). It's not an immigrant problem, it's a man problem. Don't focus on the wrong causes of a problem in your blind hatred and prejudice.

You are absolutely correct that rape is a violent and sickening crime, and that it is committed by both "natives" as well as immigrants, but I wouldn't be so cavalier in describing it as a "man problem". It certainly seems that males make up a large percentage of those who commit rape but female-on-male and female-on-female rape is not exactly an insignificant occurrence. I don't have a source handy but I remember reading the statistics for rape by female corrections officers here in the US against male inmates, and in particular against underage male inmates at juvenile facilities, and it was upsettingly common. Even amongst the non-incarcerated, female-on-male rape is a very serious issue that I don't think should be so completely dismissed.

Re: Why I’m Investing $500M in Migrants

#78
post #29

This discussion if quickly being flooded with right-wing extremists. If you make a claim, please, provide a reputable source. If you see a claim being made without a source, do something for the intellectual health of this community and downvote.

I downvoted you. This type of comment isn't constructive or helpful.

Re: Why I’m Investing $500M in Migrants

#79
post #73

Have no knowledge of Mr. Soros' policies or public stance on issues, but I ask: why is there even a need for a separate fund for migrants? From what I know, investors are driven by profit, not be ethnicity. If a business has potential to turn a profit, I don't think any VC would want to turn away. At least that's how things work for some of my Indian friends in the Valley. No one has ever denied them investment becau…

It only makes sense from a PR stand point: Drawing attention to the far outliers at the top. On a cognitive level, we all know that migrants are people not entirely unlike ourselves, capable of a wide range emotion sand behaviors, but what the news would organically expose us to are the outliers at the bottom - rapists, terrorists, organized crime. By creating this fund, Soros is trying to steer the conversation towa…

I don't know anything about Soros' intentions, but there are many reasons besides PR to create a fund like this. Refugees have a complicated nationality status, which can exclude them from the global economy. A fund such as this could specialise in working around those limitations.

Re: Why I’m Investing $500M in Migrants

#80
post #9

wsj.com Why I’m Investing $500 Million in Migrants George Soros Sept. 20, 2016 12:00 a.m. ET The world has been unsettled by a surge in forced migration. Tens of millions of people are on the move, fleeing their home countries in search of a better life abroad. Some are escaping civil war or an oppressive regime; others are forced out by extreme poverty, lured by the possibility of economic advancement for themselves…

The question is: why Europe specifically? There's plenty of neighboring countries that could take immigrants in and could use a boost of GDP by the businesses founded by migrants he speaks of. The migrants themselves would be better off there, since they wouldn't be affected by the rise of right-wing ideas in Europe.
Post reply on HN