The article does make it clear that Monegasques have significant state support for housing but that's on the assumption they aren't millionaires. The mobile workforce from outside is presumably given one of two "perks" -lower taxation outcomes (although I suspect there is some bilateral tax treaty) for at least income tax, and higher pay than they'd get working in their domicile.

I'm trying to steer clear of approval or disapproval writing this. I can't imagine making either of the two choices: to be a tax exile living there but with no statehood, or to be a mobile worker working there but having to return to an EU economy every night. The third option, being Monegasque is not open to me any more than Maltese citizenship, which is also much sought, and hard to get although not as hard as this one.

A surprising number of british working class people have Maltese citizenship, similarly Gibraltarian: thats what the british Navy does for you. I wonder if in millionaires row their advice for non-dom includes "marry a maltese"

Re: the mobile workforce, there's a tax treaty between Monaco and France (which was imposed by the latter after a total blockade of the former in the 1960s) by which French citizens working in Monaco still have to pay income tax in France, even if they are Monaco residents. It's the only case of "global taxation" of French expatriates in the world. There are, therefore, no incentives for them to live in Monaco. People who set up fiscal residence in Monaco to avoid taxes are, therefore, not French.

Ha, it's amazing how fast and efficient the French government can be at blocking these legal loopholes so that the handful of workers working in Monaco couldn't avoid paying French taxes anymore, when many publicly listed French corporations like Airbus, ST Microelectronics, Balenciaga, etc. have their financial residence in the Netherlands depriving the French state of billions in taxes for decades and nobody bats an eye, but if a few ordinary people do it then there's hell to pay.

It's almost as if there's an agenda for a double standard here, where the system is rigged against the peasantry and for the benefit of wealthy elites. Maybe those guillotines have been gathering dust for too long now.

Well, even if the current governments had the same policies as 60's France, they probably couldn't act because the Netherlands are in the EU and there are already laws to govern these things, that are not easily changed because they involve 27 countries.

Monaco on the other hand is just one little non-EU country that is nominally independent but in reality utterly dependent on France (and indeed, only independent as long as France tolerates it). So it's much easier to pressure.

French were/are not some nice baguette eating and coffee sipping polite 'bonjour monsieur' artists that visiting Paris as tourist may make you believe, rather colonialists to the core (at least people in government with actual power).

And yes French treatment of even modestly wealthy is straight out of communist guidebook - vilify, tax to hell, make up laws that even break european treaties but ignore european courts rulings on those, blame on rich all mismanagement of vast (not only social) state wealth on population deemed lazy even by french citizens themselves (I have tons of french colleagues and none hired french workers when doing some home reconstruction and they were clear why).

There are various protections in Monaco for local populations, companies have quotas on minimum mandatory hires from local population, so sometimes clueless people are hired to just sit on chair to get the numbers going, earning massive salaries (for France and western Europe at least). But its still well worth for the companies (mostly banks), some scenes are pretty surreal - 90+ senile guy barely coherent coming to the bank branch, accompanied by few 20-something models, taking literally full shopping bag worth of cash and heading right back to casino or yacht for next party. Definitely old rich money's place, overranked in my opinion but its mainly tax haven so thats not relevant.

Based on your comment I'd say you're working in the banking sector in Geneva. Just be aware that your French colleagues are extremely biased.

Would you mind saying which EU country that is?

well, I think there's also a rather small number of French worker available in the construction sector anyway...

Come on, it’s Monaco we are talking about. It’s a small island visible from the cost of France, dependents on it for absolutely everything - food, energy, water, transport, defence - and surviving as a tax haven for the ultra wealthy. It’s not colonialism. The fact that it remains independent to this day is an insult to tax paying French citizen.

It wouldn’t even be a colony. It’s literally part of the land. It’s been going around being more or less independent since 1400 and was part of France a mere 200 years ago. And to be fair 90% of what was independent willingly joined France years ago. What remains is an insignificant piece of rock which doesn’t really have its own culture and is only allowed to stay this way because French residents pay taxes in France and the foreigners who use it as tax haven are powerful. It’s nearly as shameful as the Virgin British Islands.

I've always wondered how that worked, because in Switzerland you are taxed based on the area you live, not the location of the company you work for.

are you sure it's based on where you live and not where your finances live ? ('residance fiscale')

here a website that tells you where you have to file taxes depdending on where your work in Switzerland: [guides/fiscalite-frontaliers](https://www.allo-declaration.com/guides/fiscalite-frontalier...)

No, that is exactly how it works if you are not resident in Switzerland. Quite logical IMHO. How else would you do it :)

Jesus dude, you jumped from “tax policy is unfair” to “let’s chop off some heads”.

That’s got to be be against HN rules.

This market is definitely ripe for disruption.

Doesn't Malta have a "golden passport" programme of citizenship through investment, where you can get a passport by investing less than $1,000,000 and moving to Malta for three years, virtually no questions asked? [0]

This contrasts strongly with Monaco where even the billionaire residents find it extremely tough to get citizenship.

[0] https://www.schengenvisainfo.com/eu-golden-visas/malta-golde...

Not at all. This program is now extremely difficult and far from "no questions asked".

Monaco is so small and so similar to neighbouring France so it does not make much difference versus having to commute to another neighbouring town. It just so happens that this neighbouring town is also another country.

Does this old lady have no security detail at all? Are they as prone as us to street-mugging?

Do people like usual unicorn CEOs, I know some who have street-facing houses or houses without a big fence (they don’t live in gated communities), have armed guys to protect against intruders? Do they walk their dog at night? let their kids walk to school in the morning? Do they have security detail for all this, or are they just like us, crossing their fingers that crime be low? Being CEOs with large interests at stake, they surely receive targeted blackmailing in large quantity, don’t they? Even as billionaires, do they simply take the first Uber from their airport to a downtown hotel? Do they simply assume airport-uber-hotel facilities are naturally safe, even considering how much interest they concentrate on their person?

In countries known for their lawlessness, perhaps Brazil for example, or Papua New Guinea, HNW people do indeed have security details and live in pretty fortified areas (whole districts, typically, not just houses). A visiting CEO or whoever, depending on how well-known they are and how publicly knowable their visit is likely to be, might well organise such protection when they visit. Countries like this, all countries actually, have companies specialising in exactly that.

But I think in countries where there is a credible claim to rule of law, attacks on the actual person are pretty rare. Kidnapping as a general crime is all but extinct in most of the developed world, and you'd have to kidnap someone to make any actual money - it's not like they have a billion dollars in cash on their person. You'd have to kidnap for ransom (or I suppose crypto keys these days?) which is just extraordinarily risky and unlikely to succeed in the modern, developed world.

As to the "uber from the airport" question, anyone above a certain net worth has at least one assistant who organises their calendar and travel (and their whole lives, actually) and they will have arranged transport to/from airports in advance.

This isn't a problem in a lot of areas. Believe it or not, some places are fairly safe. If you live in a safer area, why would you bother paying for security, especially if no one realizes that you might be worth getting mugged?

The other thing that makes me think it was him is that Bloomberg looked like they had setup an outside broadcast in one of the squares there as well.

1. “New rich” is flashy and gaudy and that’s not perceived as a positive. Flaunting wealth is seen as trying to show off for the admiration/approval/jealousy of the less rich. Being old rich is to be above it, and so comfortable with money you don’t need to show it off.

2. “Old Rich” is a separate world, it’s like royalty, no amount of success today makes you old rich yesterday. Since having the right connections is an important factor in success, it’s another way to close doors for everyone but your kids.

3. I think there’s a certain “aesthetic” that old-money is associated with (enjoyed by the not rich). A quasi-royal preppy guilded sort of image, and people seem to like that.

1. old money is afraid to spend frivolously because (a) they are embarrassed because they know they didn't earn it themselves and (b) they don't believe they could make it on their own if they had to. Also, old money shamelessly flaunts their wealth. Hospital naming rights, charity events, art collections, etc.

2. because old money is the opposite of meritocratic (inheritance based) they have to come up with all kinds of gatekeeping strategies to maximize the advantage of their social position.

3. social rules that keep the old monied themselves in check, to slow down the inevitable reversion to the mean.

I think charity type stuff is seen a bit different than flashy ridiculously expensive cars and such. It's a way that might be seen as showing off but is not perceived as badly and so less likely to get you noticed in a less desirable way. Similarly those art collections unless lent/donated don't leave the estate and are hardly flashy

And the art world is small. People know who the collectors are.

I'm thinking of some Hiphop stars.

Over the top behaviour, perhaps, but I'll always respect that more than the old rich dripping in the unearned benefits of their generational wealth, connections and status worship. But I'm not bitter.

I don’t bootlick billionaires and I generally consider wealth inequality a major societal failure, but I can recognize that someone who built immense wealth usually worked hard (and got very lucky!), and potentially possessed some entrepreneurial skill I lack. I also admire musicians because I have no musical ability, and I admire athletes because I have no athletic ability.

I guess what I'm getting at is that I'm curious as to how the Old Rich feel towards these non-New-Rich-but-newly-rich types. Are they still considered part of the New Rich riff-raff even if they do happen to be more sensible with their money? Or are they seen as honorary Old Rich out of respect? Or something else?

Hopefully some Old Rich HN commenter (we know you're there!) can give me some insight.

None of this crap really matters. There's plenty of old money types who spend on flamboyant crap and plenty of new money types who don't and trying to generalize based on how many generations they've had money is beyond a fool's errand.

I am not saying it’s an important distinction to me.

As a result of proximity over time, the 'old rich' have developed unique cultural habits that are easily recognized as different to 'new rich'. Every group does this. Sure, there is good and bad to it, but it's a natural and expected outcome.

To say someone has the wrong 'qualities of tastes, behaviors or values' is arrogance. Everybody's culture is handed down, that's another weasel-phrase that just disguises bigotry.

But anyway ...

Such as? 4 dinner forks?

It is not about what you do have and what you do, but rather what you don’t do that distinguishes.

Thanks. I needed something to induce vomit.

When you’re newly rich, this ability is yet unproven…

The folks that do nothing but own land and raise your rent every year are oh so classy, and the folks that actually work invent things that improve your life like idk wifi are oh so gauche.

Both are equally laughable. We shouldn’t put others in pedestals because of their wealth, full stop.

Middle class people have correctly concluded that hustling is not a virtue, and that hustling more is a fool's errand.

I personally don't aspire to work any harder than I already do, and given the choice, would strongly prefer to inherit my fortune over "earning" it.

Sheesh, those guys got skinned and mounted as trophies over a century ago.

Look up Pareto foxes and lions.

New rich on the other hand feel the need to display the fact that "they've made it", talking about money is important to them.

So there's a certain incompatibility between old and new rich, where old rich feel bothered by the talk about money.

Note. By rich here I am talking upwards of 100MM although it would appear B would soon be replacing M as the place to be money-wise in terms of wealth recognition.

You should google the Pittsburgh steel strikes and Henry Frick.

You think someone who has to shoot their workers is more ethical?

It’s genuinely hilarious to see how poor HN’s grasp of history is.

But looking over the fact that the advertising industry is fundamentally about the exploitation of cognitive biases in order to convince folks to buy things that more often than that they do not need just betrays a certain naïveté of what's going on out there.

You mean the guy who survived an assassination attempt by labor activists, who were running a totally illegal blockade of his business? And it’s not even like the laws have changed about it since then, their blockade strike would be totally illegal today as well.

Let me know if it's still legal to have your workers work with highly dangerous machinery for 12 hours a day, 7 days a week (for wages that would be comparable to federal minimum wage today ~ although it's hard to find a good inflation calculator that tracks back to the 1880s).

I'm sure that's totally comparable to the plight that Google/FB/Amzn employees have to put up with.

Obviously I admire what he did with the Gospel of Wealth & his philanthropy, but that doesn't excuse his horrible treatment of workers.

Honestly, it's just so astonishing that you can even argue in support of Henry Frick.

You should read up about the Johnstown FLood and the failure of the South Fork Dam.

I feel like the HN crowd just skims the wikipedia bio and uses that to craft a hilariously terrible argument.

I am not so much arguing in support of Frick but rather against a completely dishonest narrative where he is villainized for “shooting workers”, while completely omitting the details as to what events led to that situation.

I could go on.

Far nastier stuff than some nerd striking it rich by making a fun app.

I suppose you could call Amazon a fun app.

Sounds like Las Vegas. I don't mean to say that Vegas residents are prohibited from gambling; they aren't. There certainly are gamblers among them, both natives[1] and those who moved specifically there to gamble. But to the vast majority of Las Vegas residents the casinos are a) employers and b) a place to take out-of-town guests to for an inexpensive meal.

[1] By which I mean "regular people". Newcomers greatly outnumber those actually native to the city.

why doesn't she hire a dog walker then?

/s

I personally know a Monaco national. Typical middle-class lifestyle, maybe he secretly has a fortune be he doesn't look like it. Interestingly, despite living effectively in France, he is not French, he is not even a EU citizen, it means that when he went to study in France, he had to do more paperwork than someone from, say, Germany.

And BTW, while I didn't live in Monaco, I went there a few times (2h drive from where I live) and it definitely feels the way you describe it.

In Canada I'm not aware of any rich people small towns (unless you consider Vancouver, West Vancouver, or Toronto, or the Shaunhessy neighbourhood of Vancouver), but there is the Muskoka area of Ontario where Kevin O'Leary's wife recently smashed her boat into and killed someone

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mina_(Italian_singer)