Why I’m Investing $500M in Migrants • Hacker News Board

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

#81

Post by gonvaled » Tue, Sep 20, 2016, 4:26 PM UTC

Inconel wrote: post #8

At the risk of sounding overly cynical, while it's great that Mr. Soros is donating this money to a worthy cause, I wonder if, as long as he's feeling charitable, he might also be willing to stop domiciling his investment vehicles in jurisdictions known for supporting tax evasion/avoidance. Perhaps with the increased tax revenue, governments could afford to better shoulder the costs of adequately integrating migrants…

Investing in something which is legal to make a huge profit does not necessarily mean that you agree with it being legal. Both Soros and Buffet have repeatedly said that governments should tax them more.

Please note that advocating for governments to tax more is not even remotely similar to voluntarily paying more taxes.

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

#82

Post by randomgyatwork » Tue, Sep 20, 2016, 6:14 PM UTC

Inconel wrote: post #8

At the risk of sounding overly cynical, while it's great that Mr. Soros is donating this money to a worthy cause, I wonder if, as long as he's feeling charitable, he might also be willing to stop domiciling his investment vehicles in jurisdictions known for supporting tax evasion/avoidance. Perhaps with the increased tax revenue, governments could afford to better shoulder the costs of adequately integrating migrants…

Destroy the world with your right hand, try to clean up some of the mess with the left hand.

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

#83

Post by phs318u » Wed, Sep 21, 2016, 12:50 AM UTC

jjn2009 wrote: post #74

phs318u wrote: 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.

I think that's a bit of a simplistic generalisation. It's probably more accurate to say that there are aggressive and "dangerous" ideas that have taken hold among some groups of people, including among native westerners. And I agree that some of these ideas are inimical to free discourse and enlightenment ideals.

However, other than the pathological power-seekers that cynically exploit such ideas for their own benefit, most followers (those that are more inclined to support simplistic and extreme positions) are not much different across ideas. There is more in common between a neo-Nazi and a fundamentalist Muslim than either would care to admit. Both are fear-driven, exclusionary, apocalyptic, conspiratorial, and inclined to violent remedies. Both regard typical western centrists (both progressive and pale-conservative) as weak.

I'm not sure what the solution is, but surely some elements of a successful strategy must include education, focusing on unifying similarities, and forging alliances of moderate groups across religious, cultural, political and national boundaries. All of which take generations of sustained effort. There are no quick fixes, contrary to what demagogues would have us believe.