this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2025
674 points (98.4% liked)
conservative
1110 readers
2617 users here now
A community to discuss conservative politics and views.
Rules:
-
No racism or bigotry.
-
Be civil: disagreements happen, but that doesn't provide the right to personally insult others.
-
No spam posting.
-
Submission headline should match the article title (don't cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
-
Shitposts and memes are allowed until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
-
No trolling.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
it's a myth anyways. Gary Stevenson talks about it. ultra rich people are rich because they own physical assets that society (businesses and individuals) must pay them to rent or use. you don't have to be a resident of a place to invest in it, you can drop cash into places from anywhere. in other words, where money gets invested is NOT dependent on where the investor lives.
it's naive to think that a billionaire who leaves the country will just walk away from say, a lucrative oil drilling operation or a supermarket chain or a new skyscraper or a data center... simply because they don't live there? even if they choose to avoid US opportunities, other investors will come along to snatch it up.
billionaires can change countries and move anywhere in the world, but they can't take a stadium or an office building or a football team with them. the productive resources (factories, shops, commercial buildings, apartments) that enable wealth generation and contribute to gross productive capacity each quarter, aren't portable.
the physical resources and tools of production will still be here, the parasites who extract rents from them will not. besides, plutocrats don't pay any income or wealth taxes, so it's no net loss whatsoever.