kadabra9

5 ms·

1.
by kadabra9 15d ago
I normally wouldn't comment, but expecting someone with that skillset and those kind of opportunities available to them to work for free for 4-6 months with the promise of actual pay "when our seed round closes" was so egregi
2.
by kadabra9 15d ago
[flagged]
3.
by kadabra9 20d ago
in before this is shadowbanned.
4.
by kadabra9 2mo ago
Isn't that the point? Keeping data centers out of neighborhoods that don't want them?
5.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
Take a look at his post history, all he does is shill for offshoring so his portfolio companies can save a buck on labor costs.
6.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
I'm shocked, absolutely shocked that a Bluesky post would be deliberately misleading to push a narrative that we need more taxes.
7.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
Talent diversity willing to work for lower salaries is present elsewhere. That's really what it comes down to.
8.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
At least you own it, rather than making up an excuse like "talent shortage" or "pipeline" issue to try to conceal the fact that at the end of the day you're just trying to save a buck.
9.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
There are plenty of domestic candidates that have those skills and backgrounds. You would just rather find offshore candidates and pay them less, rather than paying domestic salaries. Which, ok, fair enough, but at least own it instead of f
10.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
Yeah, we know. I wish guys like you could just be honest and admit its really just about trying to save on labor costs rather than trying to frame this issue like there's some massive lack of skilled domestic engineering talent here.
11.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
I love how this is always framed as a "pipeline and talent" problem issue (its not), when it's really a "pipeline and talent at salaries I want to pay" issue.
12.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
isn't one meal a day another form of calorie restriction though? It's very difficult to not be in a calorie deficit when you only eat once a day and are consistently active.
13.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
It's already 37% (for Federal). Add in another 14% for California and its over 50%. But even for simplicity sake, going to 40% would be far better and more practical than confiscating 5% of total assets and net worth.
14.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
I literally said there should be some sort of final penalty or taxable event associated with borrowing against illiquid assets and unrealized gains for very HNW individuals.
15.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
> America was already taxing wealthy through the teeth years ago Except they weren’t. Those lovely 90% tax rates from the 1950s everyone on Reddit loves to bring up weren’t really paid by anyone. The effective tax rate paid after the loo
16.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
If they leave (and some already have) they take their tax base with them. Not just for this one time levy, but for future tax years too. Then where will the state go to make up the revenue shortfall? Either raising taxes on other groups or
17.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
I didn’t say the tax gap caused the drop in GDP. I did say the capital flight caused the tax to wildly underperform revenue estimates, which is objectively true. I love how this goes from “there’s no evidence wealthy move” to, when presente
18.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
In 2022 Norway increased wealth tax to 1.1%, expected to bring in an additional $146M tax revenue. Individuals with a net worth of $54B left the country, led to a $594M loss in tax revenue. https://citizenx.com/insights&#x2F
19.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
The US debt is nearly 39 trillion dollars. Confiscating all of the assets of the nation’s billionaires wealth would yield 6-8T, depending on what kind creative accounting is done in anticipation of a wealth tax. So yeah it would help re
20.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
You’re discussing raising corporate or individual income tax rates. I’m discussing a proposed broad wealth tax on unrealized gains and assets. The tax rates of the 50s were high, but were filled with loopholes and deductions in that the e
21.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
I mean when you just make up a number, you should expect to be called out for it, lol. And I did engage with the real point. Even if it WAS 14 trillion dollars, that wouldn't fund the government for 2 years. And then what? Why is the s
22.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
I support some sort of disincentive to prevent HNW individuals from borrowing against assets for income. I do not support wealth taxes or taxing unrealized gains (unless you get rebates for unrealized losses lol) There SHOULD be some mechan
23.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
Of course its easy for you to say - its simple to just point the finger and claim you're entitled to your "fair share" of someone else's property simply because they have more than you. And my main point isn't even
24.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
That’s a separate discussion. I think there should be some sort of tax penalty to borrowing against assets as a sort of infinite money glitch.
25.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
The government is taking 22% of your INCOME. Not your entire net worth. This is vastly different. HNW don’t have their net worth sitting in a pool of cash like Donald Duck as much as Reddit would like to believe. Its property, company stock
26.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
Except is not 14 trillion (in the US) It is closer to 8 trillion. Even if it WAS 14 trillion, the fact that such an insane measure wouldn’t even fully fund the entire government for two years shows you can’t just confiscate your way out of
27.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
And where will we get the money to fund this fantasy land in 8 months after the government runs out of money and we’ve already stolen all the billionaires assets? Should we move on to anyone with a net worth over $1M and start stealing thei
28.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
You could confiscate 100% of the wealth of every billionaire in this country and it wouldn’t fund the government for an entire year. It is and always will be a government spending issue, the government can’t help itself but to just steal mo
29.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
This tax would do effectively nothing to address growing inequality between billionaires and everyone else.
30.
by kadabra9 7mo ago
Everyone loves deciding what their "fair share" of other people's net worth (not even income!) is. Sorry, but the state just confiscating 5% of someone's net worth (unrealized or not) is absolute madness, and rightfully

More ›