• QuarterSwede@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Lol, first thought I had. My company’s state president is an ex-pat from the UK and “loves America.”

    • ISOmorph@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      32
      ·
      5 months ago

      I understand the hate, but that’s a very shortsighted wish. How do you tax the rich if they leave?

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        42
        ·
        5 months ago

        If their assets are onshore, they’d either have to sell them or be taxed anyway. If their assets are offshore, they probably weren’t paying taxes on them anyway.

      • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        5 months ago

        If it is income based taxing: they leave, and the demand is filled by someone else who takes their place.

        Easy example: grocery store owner A says I don’t like it, moves. Obviously someone else will open a grocery store there if it is needed. They will be taxed accordingly.

      • ddh@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        5 months ago

        What if the rich are a blight that create poverty by sucking up the capital?

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        How are we going to fertilize our gardens if we don’t keep our shit in a bucket next to the toilet?

        The value these pieces of shit bring to the table is far less than the damages caused by the exploitative business practices that made them rich. Taxes are not a sufficient justification for keeping them around.

  • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    So 53% say they’re less likely to leave after the election? That seems to indicate that the candidates elected were marginally more pro millionaire than the previous ones.

    • explore_broaden@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      That isn’t included the percentage that didn’t change, because they aren’t interested in picking up and leaving the country just because they don’t like the government.

    • thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      Less likely to leave or it made no difference, I guess.

      It could also be that with the previous government only 10% were considering leaving.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    5 months ago

    Cool. Enjoy seeing someone else enjoying your swanky London penthouse and your manor in the country. Maybe even let tourists go through the latter.

  • wewbull@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    5 months ago

    “More likely”. So are they leaving or not? It’s easy to say that they are, but actually leaving takes effort.

    • nogooduser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Yeah. It’s a pretty meaningless statistic really.

      I was definitely more likely to leave the UK after the brexit referendum than before it but I’m still here. The chances before were less than 1% and the chances after were closer to 1% but probably still didn’t exceed it.

      P.s. I’m not a millionaire in case anyone is wondering.

  • Prior_Industry@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    5 months ago

    Blah blah blah. Any hint of being taxed same thing gets rolled out. Can’t keep going like this billionaires, time to pay back into the systems you benefit from.