Re:Tech firms face growing resentment of parent employees du...
by tyfon on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @08:40AM
(#24420331)
If you only look at the cost you are correct. But at the same time having more people able to work increases the tax revenue of the government which in turn makes the total influence on the economy of the country not as bad. Too often people only look at costs in these scenarios. I see you are not opposed to the idea regardless but it is a thing to bear in mind :)
Re:Tech firms face growing resentment of parent employees du...
by SketchySeaBeast on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @09:27AM
(#24420754)
> This also means that people are still paying a higher price for it, but that price is just mixed in with the rest of their taxes.
Given that Norway has extremely successful oil and gas investments that doesn't seem right. This is money that the average person would never see anyways. It's not money coming from their taxes back into their pockets.
Re:Tech firms face growing resentment of parent employees du...
by chha on Thursday September 10, 2020 @03:00AM
(#24429663)
Keep in mind that most of the money Norway make from oil & gas are invested [1], it's not money used directly for anything in Norway. Up to 4% of the money made from the investments can be spent, the rest is re-invested.
Of the 1.173,5 bn NOK income in the 2020 national budget, 1.084,8 bn NOK are from taxes and various charges.[2]
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Pension_Fund_of_Nor... [2] - https://www.statsbudsjettet.no/Statsbudsjettet-2020/Satsinge... (Norwegian)
Re:Tech firms face growing resentment of parent employees du...
by sanderjd on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @01:16PM
(#24423263)
Fair enough, it is more complex than I stated. Though there is still an opportunity cost; if that money were not being spent on this, it could be spent on other things, or given to taxpayers. I'm just pushing back on the idea that things are "free" when the government pays for them, but costs don't go away just because they are paid for by the government. It's a pedantic point though.
To be clear, I'm in favor of governments taxing for the purpose of providing services of benefit to society. But having the government cover costs does not make those costs go away, it just shifts how people pay for them.