I like hearing about sociopaths that utilize the infrastructure provided by the U.S. but don't want to pay back. Contrast that to the evil poor that utilize the infrastructure, have nothing but are demonized for not paying.
If he'd actually continued to live in the US, I might have sympathy for this argument. But he's moved out. The US tax regime where expat US citizens still have to pay full tax to the US (except where there's a tax treaty that limits double taxation) is exceptionally harsh - almost no other countries do that.
> The US tax regime where expat US citizens still have to pay full tax to the US (except where there's a tax treaty that limits double taxation) is exceptionally harsh - almost no other countries do that.
This.
The US keeps taxing you after you leave. And for citizens, it is for life.
Why do you want citizenship? What do you think it gives you over having the Green Card. When I was going through the process to get my Green Card, my lawyer pretty plainly said that unless I really wanted to vote, getting citizenship gives you nothing but ads many liabilities.
The only real benefit I could have seen for myself was if I lived outside of the US for more than six months of the year from time to time.
I don't think it's entirely unreasonable. After all, you'd probably still expect the US Military to come to your aid if the shit hit the fan wherever you are abroad, right?
I'm not sure which infrastructure you're referring to. Roads? Police? College?
He paid for college. He paid for taxes while he was using the infrastructure you've mentioned. Now he's going to greener pastures and you still expect him to continue to support the U.S. through taxes? I don't think that makes a whole lot of sense. I don't continue to pay college tuition because at some point that "infrastructure" helped me land a job. I paid that debt off, and it's behind me.
I don't want to turn this into a political discussion, but this is why I disagree with people suggesting that the U.S. will fix its problems by increasing the taxes on the rich. The rich will leave- the U.S. doesn't offer anything that other countries in the world can't, and at a cheaper cost.
"sociopaths that utilize the infrastructure provided by the U.S."
given the number of high qualified jobs Facebook has created, the taxes that both FB and employees are paying, and Facebook's continued support towards the startup ecosystem, calling ES a sociopath is simply wrong.
By infrastructure do you mean our military industrial complex? Subsidies for the agro and oil industries? Medicare, social security? Our welfare system?
Maybe our 3rd world quality public educational system? He didn't attend a public high school or college.
Comments
I like hearing about sociopaths that utilize the infrastructure provided by the U.S. but don't want to pay back. Contrast that to the evil poor that utilize the infrastructure, have nothing but are demonized for not paying.
If he'd actually continued to live in the US, I might have sympathy for this argument. But he's moved out. The US tax regime where expat US citizens still have to pay full tax to the US (except where there's a tax treaty that limits double taxation) is exceptionally harsh - almost no other countries do that.
> The US tax regime where expat US citizens still have to pay full tax to the US (except where there's a tax treaty that limits double taxation) is exceptionally harsh - almost no other countries do that.
This.
The US keeps taxing you after you leave. And for citizens, it is for life.
That's pretty hostile. I came here and now have a green card, with the intention of eventually gaining citizenship.
Now I'm wondering how much I've harmed my future mobility (should I choose to return to my birth country).
Why do you want citizenship? What do you think it gives you over having the Green Card. When I was going through the process to get my Green Card, my lawyer pretty plainly said that unless I really wanted to vote, getting citizenship gives you nothing but ads many liabilities.
The only real benefit I could have seen for myself was if I lived outside of the US for more than six months of the year from time to time.
> The only real benefit I could have seen for myself was if I lived outside of the US for more than six months of the year from time to time.
Pretty much this. Should I choose to move back home, it'd be nice not to have to go through the whole green card process over again.
Maybe I'm hedging my bets too much.
Citizenship gives you blue passport which so much nicer for travel than so many passports in other colors. I think only UK is better.
Well, after few years on GC you are going to be subject of the same texation law anyway, so it doesn't matter if you to have citizenship or not.
I don't think it's entirely unreasonable. After all, you'd probably still expect the US Military to come to your aid if the shit hit the fan wherever you are abroad, right?
Btw, this doesn't apply if you go for a visit to the country of your original citizenship.
Hmm ok down vote away, but that's the principal behind this law
I'm not sure which infrastructure you're referring to. Roads? Police? College?
He paid for college. He paid for taxes while he was using the infrastructure you've mentioned. Now he's going to greener pastures and you still expect him to continue to support the U.S. through taxes? I don't think that makes a whole lot of sense. I don't continue to pay college tuition because at some point that "infrastructure" helped me land a job. I paid that debt off, and it's behind me.
I don't want to turn this into a political discussion, but this is why I disagree with people suggesting that the U.S. will fix its problems by increasing the taxes on the rich. The rich will leave- the U.S. doesn't offer anything that other countries in the world can't, and at a cheaper cost.
"sociopaths that utilize the infrastructure provided by the U.S."
given the number of high qualified jobs Facebook has created, the taxes that both FB and employees are paying, and Facebook's continued support towards the startup ecosystem, calling ES a sociopath is simply wrong.
Saverin may or may not be a sociopath[1], but Facebook's economic impact isn't evidence of it one way or the other.
1. In the clinical sense it's hardly reasonable to infer that he is; the parent poster was being hyperbolic.
By infrastructure do you mean our military industrial complex? Subsidies for the agro and oil industries? Medicare, social security? Our welfare system?
Maybe our 3rd world quality public educational system? He didn't attend a public high school or college.