Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Norway, the Country Where No Salaries Are Secret (bbc.com)

Posted by msmash on from the how-they-live dept.

In Norway, there are no such secrets. Anyone can find out how much anyone else is paid -- and it rarely causes problems. From a report: In the past, your salary was published in a book. A list of everyone's income, assets and the tax they had paid, could be found on a shelf in the public library. These days, the information is online, just a few keystrokes away. The change happened in 2001, and it had an instant impact. "It became pure entertainment for many," says Tom Staavi, a former economics editor at the national daily, VG. "At one stage you would automatically be told what your Facebook friends had earned, simply by logging on to Facebook. It was getting ridiculous." Transparency is important, Staavi says, partly because Norwegians pay high levels of income tax -- an average of 40.2 percent compared to 33.3 percent in the UK, according to Eurostat, while the EU average is just 30.1 percent. "When you pay that much you have to know that everyone else is doing it, and you have to know that the money goes to something reasonable," he says. "We [need to] have trust and confidence in both the tax system and in the social security system."

129 of 218 comments (clear)

  1. 2001? by Calydor · · Score: 2

    News? When the article is about something that happened 16 years ago?

    --
    -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    1. Re:2001? by Gussington · · Score: 1

      But it's 'from a report' so it must be important...

    2. Re: 2001? by Z00L00K · · Score: 2

      And it's the same in Sweden since many years.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    3. Re:2001? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Anonymous searches have been disallowed for the last three years.
      People now have to log in using their national ID number.
      This change reduced the yearly number of searches from 16.5 million to around 2 million.

      This change discourages casual browsing, but can easily be circumvented.

      Would you want a future employer to know your current salary and assets?
      Norwegians are no different than you, and human nature is what it is.

    4. Re:2001? by eastlight_jim · · Score: 5, Informative

      The reason it's in the current news (at least on the BBC) is that the BBC have recently published the salaries of many of their top earners for the first time. The discussion has arisen because many are earning in the millions and are effectively paid from the public purse (well, licence fee but all the same in the end...).

      Original article

    5. Re:2001? by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Provided that the Bitcoin is keeping its value.

      If in the future you can't exchange the Bitcoin for anything but the currencies of odd states in the future then it may be a virtual asset that's dead.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    6. Re:2001? by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's still news to Americans that the world doesn't implode simply because someone knows how much you get paid, or why you went to see the doctor last week.

    7. Re: 2001? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      No, the world implodes when you get cut off from potential promotions or new jobs because you get looked up ahead of time. An insurance company might reject you because of that rough spat of pneumonia a year or two back. It's never the data itself that's the problem; it's the access that *others* get to this data, and the decisions (and thus actions) they take in response to such data that creates problems.

      Information is power, and giving the public access to that particular information is bullshit.

      That "the insurance company might reject you" is something that pretty much only the morons in the USA put up with.

    8. Re: 2001? by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      Why should pay be a secret?

      --
      Eat the rich.
    9. Re: 2001? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you work for a state government (I'm a college professor), your income is probably posted online. In Florida, all state employees' salaries are posted for several years back in a giminstrous excel spreadspeet. An exception is made for grad students, but all tenure track and non tenure track faculty are there. The governor, Rick Scott, thought it would be a good idea to see where the tuition money was going. All that anyone learned was how little of it actually goes to the faculty. University budgets are, on the whole, black holes that make Hollywood accounting look simple.

    10. Re:2001? by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Why do Evans and Lineker make so much more than the others?

    11. Re: 2001? by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 2, Informative

      Because secret negotiations result in a lot of highly-skilled individuals being paid less than they're actually worth, because they mistakenly think their below-average pay is average. It's exploitation by the employers.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    12. Re:2001? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Would you want a future employer to know your current salary and assets?

      In Norway, you don't have that option, and you haven't had it for some considerable time.

      To put that into context, the majority of people I know who live, earn and work in Norway are not happy about losing their jobs, income and careers when Britain leaves the EU. Some are trying to marry local boys/ girls/ whatevers ; some are looking to try to get citizenships and some are looking at retirement.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  2. I wonder if... by dwywit · · Score: 1

    that kind of transparency generates a social pressure for high earners to justify their income.

    --
    They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    1. Re:I wonder if... by wierd_w · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't see it making it hard to justify a large salary, what I see it being a complication for, is large yearly bonuses for management, while the rank and file get shafted.

      Generalized higher pay grades, even really obscene ones, would not really be an obstacle as long as they 1) pay their proper % of tax, and 2) have that income as a steady, constant thing.

      It is when the managers make up fairy stories about how "We gotta do triple shifts or the company will go under! OMG!", pay everyone beneath them peanuts, and then give themselves huge, fat bonuses at the end of the year for "Doing such a great job!!" that people will notice it, and then raise cain.

      I personally would LOVE to see this level of wage transparency in the US-- It would make a great many HR, and management teams break out in cold, bloody sweats.

    2. Re:I wonder if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      As long as others are not significantly underpaid, people don't mind higher salaries of others.
      Usually the main question is "Why am i paid so little..".

      Honestly many primitive jobs should pay more than leading roles as there are numerous unpaid bonuses (luxury car, personal space, ability to schedule your own time, chance to make an impact etc) and often the job is more sustainable, compared to e.g. lifting crates, that is both taxing physically and degrading mentally.

    3. Re:I wonder if... by Megol · · Score: 1

      Really? No. Just no.

    4. Re:I wonder if... by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      I personally would LOVE to see this level of wage transparency in the US-- It would make a great many HR, and management teams break out in cold, bloody sweats.

      I dunno. I could just as easily see an HR department using that against you.

      "Well, we'd really love to give you a raise, but we'd have problems if everyone saw how much more you're making..."

      Any Norwegians here? Would love to hear how this actually affects your relationship with your employer and fellow employees.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    5. Re:I wonder if... by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      I doubt it. People already roughly know what others are earning. Where it might help is with tax dodges. People complain about high earners, but these can in turn point out at the public record of their tax return and show that they contribute to the public coffers accordingly. But someone showing a €1M income paying only €50k in taxes has some explaining to do.

      Though personally I lean more towards the guys who came up with the window tax, which is exactly what you think it is. It's often cited as one of the more ridiculous ways the gov't tries to tax us, and of course it led to people simply bricking up their windows. But the motivation behind the window tax was everything but ridiculous. The government wanted to tax people according to their income, but they also thought that people's income levels weren't any of their damn business. So they counted windows instead.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    6. Re:I wonder if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It might make things easier: It limits the possibilities to execute the art of trying to manage keep some people underpaid. If there's no work spent on that, HR has less work to do, it makes their lives easier.

    7. Re:I wonder if... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      This eliminates the situation where lawful people don't even ask because it's against company policy

      It's much easier to know you are underpaid, and then perhaps do something about it, if there's complete transparency.

      Of course it could work both ways.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    8. Re:I wonder if... by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      I dunno. I could just as easily see an HR department using that against you.

      "Well, we'd really love to give you a raise, but we'd have problems if everyone saw how much more you're making..."

      Any Norwegians here? Would love to hear how this actually affects your relationship with your employer and fellow employees.

      That's the general fear about making salaries transparent - that high earners will have to justify their high salaries and thus see that it might be lowered. What really happens is those who make less start asking questions as to why they make less. Sometimes it's genuine skill and contributions - Employee A makes more because their work is high quality and people like working with Employee A - using his work output, working with them in general, etc. Employee B, however, barely produces output, and people hate using it because there are so many errors than it needs to be corrected before it can be used, as well as people just avoid interacting with Employee B.

      Other times, there can be real problems. This is in general the bigger cauxe - perhaps they didn't negotiate their starting salary as much, or other reason. This is why companies hate salary transparency - they don't want high performers to know how little they're being paid compared to their peers whom were recently hired. One coworker made a mention that if he applied for a job the company was offering, he'd make more money. (He went to his managers and the company re-evaluated all their pay scales).

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    9. Re:I wonder if... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      "I don't see it making it hard to justify a large salary, what I see it being a complication for, is large yearly bonuses for management, while the rank and file get shafted."

      But in Norway, doesn't the tax system give everyone about the same net income, no matter how much they may gross?

    10. Re:I wonder if... by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Everybody here is missing the other point: This global transparency ensures that people know their tax money "goes to something reasonable"

      It totally keeps the rich, the government, etc., in check.

      --
      No sig today...
    11. Re:I wonder if... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wage transparency is great for so many reasons. As well as preventing the kind of abuse you describe, it also makes it easy to get a fair salary without heavy negotiation, and be sure you aren't getting screwed over.

      As a result it also tends to drive down various pay gaps (gender, ethnicity etc). Some people claim that such gaps don't really exist, but the fact that they are reduced in countries with wage transparency disproves that.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re:I wonder if... by haruchai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      - the only 'explaining' they 'have to do' is so that others can also try and do the same. AFAIC income and wealth taxes are robbery, armed robbery regardless if it is 100%, 50% or 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000001%

      Somalia was tax-free for almost a 1/4 century; you should have emigrated.
      If nothing else you'd have a much greater appreciation of both the value of taxation & what "armed robbery" is really like.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    13. Re: I wonder if... by Gavagai80 · · Score: 2

      If wage transparency is bad for everybody, why does Norway have the world's 5th highest salaries?

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    14. Re:I wonder if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The US has a much different culture when it comes to social justice. Old countries, like Norway and Japan, have more of a sense of community than the US, where no-one gives fuck about anybody but themselves. In business negotiations a deal can be struck where the opposing party may suffer irreparable damage, where in civilized countries though is given to the other party's survival.
      The US was founded on conquest, genocide, slavery, and war. The Land of the Free's constitution was written by slave owners who had stolen and killed the original land owners.
      Taxation in Norway and and other EU countries are mostly funding social projects, not so in the US where the 100% of personal income tax revenue is funding the military. Wars are invented to keep the military industrial complex rolling in perpetuity.
      Most democratic countries have political parties with differing opinions, not so in the US where there is only one more party than in China.
      The school system in the US is designed to make people into stupid unquestioning consumers, and soldiers, that will vote idiots like Trump and Bush into an office, for which there is no requirements for any relevant qualifications or talent. Trump has never been elected to even a minor political office. He is a dirty simpleton unschooled trust-fund-baby businessman whose grandfather founded their fortune by renting hotels to prostitutes, and has many bankruptcies and scandals behind him. He makes George Bush look like a smart guy.

    15. Re:I wonder if... by Gavagai80 · · Score: 2

      But in Norway, doesn't the tax system give everyone about the same net income, no matter how much they may gross?

      Nope. Some other European countries have high tax brackets for big earners, but Norway's top tax bracket is only 39%, which is lower than the USA: https://taxfoundation.org/how-...

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    16. Re: I wonder if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Large oil reserves, and only ~6 million people (and almost zero immigration, mainly cuz it's cold there). Starting in the 60's and 70's, they went from being one of the world's poorest country to one of the richest per capita.

      And (while not directly related to this topic), they use the oil revenue (production taxed at ~78%) to fund a very large public pension fund. Exercise for the student: compare and contrast that to the US or Middle East.

    17. Re: I wonder if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Anyone who wants to take the moral high ground based on something that happened hundreds of years ago is going to have to start their conquest from somewhere other than Europe.

      The European system of government around the time of the expansions of settlement in the new world could be summed up as "steal everything you can't rape."

      In fact, those douchebags who showed up and killed everyone into submission in the Americas WERE Europeans for fucks sake. It wasn't the act of stealing the land and raping the women that made them Americans. In fact, MANY of them got back on the damn boats and went back to Europe after a campaign to screw and loot their way across the old country yet again.

      Now if you want to see who really gets the historical moral high ground trophy take a long hard look at no human beings whatsoever.

    18. Re: I wonder if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      or Alaska, which is actually a more appropriate comparison.

    19. Re:I wonder if... by Lord+Crc · · Score: 2

      But in Norway, doesn't the tax system give everyone about the same net income, no matter how much they may gross?

      No. The base tax is 36%, but there's a decent base deduction on the gross income to find the taxable income. Then, if you make more than a certain amount (taxable, higher than the average income) you pay an extra ~10% on the amount above that limit.

    20. Re: I wonder if... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      As oil prices keep declining, I doubt that those pension funds can be sustained. Speaking of which, why can't Norway be the energy supplier to the Three Seas countries from Poland to Ukraine to Bulgaria - countries that want to stop being blackmailed by Moscow?

    21. Re:I wonder if... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      THIS!!! I'm more often than not happy to treat the salaries of others as none of my own business. Likewise, what I make or spend is nobody else's either. I just need to be making enough to be prosperous myself.

      People who bitch about how much CEOs make overlook the fact that looting those guys is not gonna increase their net pay.

    22. Re:I wonder if... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Well, we'd really love to give you a raise, but we'd have problems if everyone saw how much more you're making..."

      That is a Good Thing. If two people are doing equal work, one should not get a raise just for being more assertive.

    23. Re: I wonder if... by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      RTFS:

      Norwegians pay high levels of income tax -- an average of 40.2 percent

      Sure, they pay a lot - but nearly HALF of that goes back to the Government in income tax alone. Yes, you earn more - and you get to give that right back.

      Plus you have the third most expensive beer in Europe, trailing two Swiss cities. In general, Norway is incredibly expensive to live in, nearly 50% more expensive than the EC/EU28 average. You have to earn more, because you pay more across the board - taxes, food, and all other expenses.

      Just like if you're an engineer in San Francisco, you tend to earn more than if you're an engineer in Detroit. Companies HAVE to pay you more because the cost of living is so much higher. They couldn't hire ANYONE if they paid Detroit-level salaries for San Francisco living.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    24. Re: I wonder if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Large oil reserves...

      Do you really believe that? Because if this is such a significant factor, then it would mean that neighbouring countries Denmark and Sweden (culturally and politically very similar) would score significantly poorer than Norway because they do not have this "important economic boost factor". But wait, the article lists Denmark's result as 96% of Norway's (and while Sweden is not included in top 10, they are surely not far behind).

      So how do you then defend that oil is a relevant factor if two extremely similar countries scores for all practical purposes identical but one of them has oil and the other does not?

    25. Re:I wonder if... by ranton · · Score: 1

      That article is garbage, since Norwegians make far more than $19k on average and Norwegians do not have the highest average salaries. Norway is doing quite well for itself but this article is simply not accurate.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    26. Re:I wonder if... by ranton · · Score: 1

      "That's their problem. Either I'm worth the extra money to you or I'm not. I think I am, but if you disagree I'm confident I can find employment elsewhere."

      It is the company's problem, including the other employees, if they cannot attract enough top talent to compete in the marketplace. On two occasions I have had to say no to a company which really needed help because their pay grades were too strict. My wife works at one of those companies and their IT problems in particular will probably never be solved if they cannot hire some $175k+ talent (Midwest suburbs, so not as high as the coasts).

      This might not be a big problem for an entire country which operates similarly, but in the US not being able to pay top performers far more than regular staff is a recipe for disaster. And unfortunately everyone thinks they are awesome. Not many senior developers making $140k salaries are going to admit to themselves that their $190k "peer" is that much more useful to the company.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    27. Re:I wonder if... by ranton · · Score: 1

      "Well, we'd really love to give you a raise, but we'd have problems if everyone saw how much more you're making..."

      That is a Good Thing. If two people are doing equal work, one should not get a raise just for being more assertive.

      What makes you think they are doing equal work?

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    28. Re: I wonder if... by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      Wage transparency is bad for everyone.

      Wage transparency is good for employees and bad for employers (because it means they are dealing with employees more as a group than individuals).

    29. Re: I wonder if... by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      This only happens when a company is profitable with a monopoly.

    30. Re:I wonder if... by haruchai · · Score: 1

      If the tax-hating, gun-loving, Bible-thumpin' had things their way, Somalia is but a taste of what that paradise will be.
      A lot of them are preppin' for the apocalypse and ready to bring it on. Just so I can keep an eye on what the extremists are up to, I have subscriptions to a number of newsletters from the fringes.
      There seem to be no shortage of places to buy powdered eggs & milk, an astonishing variety of lethal weapons & many book-length expositions on how Barack & Hillary sold their souls to the Devil to bring evil down on America.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    31. Re:I wonder if... by xiux · · Score: 1

      If two people are doing equal work, [...]

      That is a huge assumption. If it's not the case it could have a chilling effect on the employer to pay the employee proportionally the value they bring the company.

    32. Re:I wonder if... by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      It truely is amazing how one of the most gender equal countries in the world with complete pay transparency still has just as large a difference in pay between the genders. It's almost as if men and women make different choices in life, but we all know that isn't possible is it.

    33. Re: I wonder if... by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      You're not well aquatinted with feminist ideology are you?
      It wouldn't matter if the salary of every person in the country was public and it showed that women earned twice as much as men, feminists would still claim that men were paid more than women.

    34. Re:I wonder if... by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      The united states did not have an income tax until July 1, 1862.
      How did we ever make it so far without income taxes?

    35. Re:I wonder if... by haruchai · · Score: 1

      The united states did not have an income tax until July 1, 1862.

      How did we ever make it so far without income taxes?

      Hint: What was the biggest, most noteworthy event in America during that time?

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
  3. Nothing special by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The same information has been available in other European countries since the late 90s or early 00s too. I think it's the case at least in Sweden and in Finland where similar legislation has been in place for at least 15 years now. You can get information on anyone's taxable income.

    It has just proved what many have suspected: men make more than women. But what no-one has really bothered to discuss is why. Nowadays it's not about employers paying more to men just because they're men. It's because they have pursued higher paying careers. And before anyone gets into the whole child thing, mind you that the laws in e.g. the Nordic countries are extremely favorable for women (and men!) on having children while staying on their career paths. You can pretty much choose which of the parents stay home and take care of the child -- or you can switch at any point you like. It's just that women still choose to stay home more.

    Other than finding out the obvious, this legislation hasn't really brought any real benefits to anyone. Salaries are pretty much the same for everyone in a similar position because of the strong position unions have historically had.

    1. Re:Nothing special by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      AC the Why is easy.
      When a person takes a break from work the people who stay working for weeks, months and years advance in the private sector.
      Put in some effort and get rewarded.
      The person returns to work and finds all their colleagues who put the long hours have got advancements and promotions.
      Re "higher paying careers."
      Some people want to be a doctor or a lawyer or a horse doctor. Some enjoyed studying biology. Some law, some management or arts.
      Many nations don't suggest what to study and then offer a job working in a factory that the government has to found a need for that skill in.
      People can study for a while, try working in a profession they like and then not work for a time for any reason.
      Thats what freedom is. The numbers a gov collects will show that change over a decade of a persons working life after university.
      Its not a wage difference. Just people selecting what they want to do with their skills or how to spend their own time.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    2. Re:Nothing special by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      > Put in some effort and get rewarded.

      Turns out, that's not how it works. Anywhere. Commonly held fallacy though.

    3. Re:Nothing special by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is no such fact.

    4. Re:Nothing special by Megol · · Score: 1

      LOL! I'm moderated troll when correcting someone and an AC with absolutely not argument is moderated as insightful.

      Even adjusted for the measurable fact that women tend to be more educated than men for a certain job there is a real and measurable wage gap. Observe I use the word measurable twice - this isn't something I make up for some reason, this is something that have been measured. I don't provide links partially because the OP didn't, I don't to waste my time for a crowd that should be able to do some simple searching and most importantly because then those that don't like the facts will think I cherry-picked the links. Do search. Be informed. Reach informational nirvana.

      [It's funny because it shows that people actually believe in magic - that if one denies measurable (and they have been measured by trustworthy entities repeatedly) reality will conform to their expectations and wants. That is a common psychological trait of people and something one should try to avoid. I suggest using active conscious feedback for this and similar things - kind of a scientific meditation on feelings and reactions in order to adjust to the real world and avoid natural but erroneous reasoning]

      Personally I think the wage gap still existing in countries that tries to actively avoid it (e..g the Scandinavian ones) is due to networking effects - humans tend to clump together into groups with an internal ID and members of the groups that conform exactly are (often subconsciously) set aside. Gender is one such factor that do influence group interactions, people with different cultural behavior is another factor, skin color yet another. I'm not talking about racism or misogyny only about conscious and unconscious group dynamics.

    5. Re: Nothing special by Megol · · Score: 1

      I live in the real world - in realtime. I live as much as possible based on truth (even if I don't like always like it) via the successive approximation of scientific measurements. You should try it rather than listen to politicians.

    6. Re:Nothing special by Megol · · Score: 1

      Google is your friend. Be informed.

  4. Same in Finland. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Same thing in Finland, everyones total income is public, of course you don't nesseccary know how much you peers salaries are as, they might have additional income from through other work etc. However income from stock and other investments are show separately as they have different tax structure.

  5. Nice to have for corporation tax too by hughbar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Certainly, given the avoidance in the UK by Google etc., it would be nice to know exactly what all the corporates are [not]paying compared to their turnover in the territory. I say turnover, because there's less possibility of manipulation and it will give some guide to profitability.

    Profit is easy to manipulate, in order to make tax liabilities disappear, yet the offending company still uses the infrastructure in the country. This is a point made by Warren Buffett, that well-known communist, not specifically by me.

    That way, we know which companies to boycott. And yes, since you're asking, I have no FB account, don't buy anything from Google ads and am beginning to minimise my use of Amazon. https://www.hive.co.uk/ support local bookshops in the UK, for example.

    --
    On y va, qui mal y pense!
  6. Re:And that's a good thing? by Gussington · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How is making your contribution to the public purse public anything soviet like? By keeping this information the shadows you allow the thieves at the big end of town to continue to allow steal from the rest of us. .

  7. Its not salries, its taxable income. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And we have the same in Sweden. Most people whom make a lot of money have tons of deductibles so they show a low income in the book.

  8. Re:trust and confidence by Megol · · Score: 1

    Both the tax system and the social security system can be changed if people wanted to, we are talking about a democracy. How is your post relevant?

  9. is 40% high by TheCarp · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I mean I know we Americans like to pretend to have low taxes, but, in reality, we just have a lot of misdirection and backdoor taxes.

    Every fee you pay for a government service, especially the ones they impose on you like driver's licenses which need to be renewed for some reason and the same with car registrations. Then they setup their regulations to maximize offences so they can disproportionately rake in money from the poor. Those fines are all taxes really.

    40%? That isn't far off from some estimates I have seen for totals of what a lot of Americans give our worthless government.

    --
    "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    1. Re:is 40% high by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Just as a datapoint: I earn about $54k in Norway, and I paid an effective 36% in direct taxes, plus the sales taxes (25%, 12% on food).

    2. Re: is 40% high by Entrope · · Score: 2

      40% income tax is high, and on top of that is VAT. You get taxed 40% on what you earn, and 18% or 25% on most of what you spend.

    3. Re:is 40% high by markdavis · · Score: 2

      >"40%? That isn't far off from some estimates I have seen for totals of what a lot of Americans give our worthless government."

      Do you REALLY think income tax is all the taxes they pay? You completely skipped VAT, employer's SS tax, corporate tax (which gets passed onto the price of everything), excise tax, property tax, Inheritance and gift tax.

    4. Re:is 40% high by hord · · Score: 1

      If you are self-employed (as I have been), you start with a 35% tax rate. Most of what people pay in taxes is hidden from them either in small costs or just by the process itself. Ask anyone how much tax was taken out of their last paycheck and they won't have a clue. The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.

    5. Re:is 40% high by Shimbo · · Score: 1

      If you look at the title of the spreadsheet, or scroll right and see that the totals add to 100%, you'll discover that it's about the breakdown of taxes and nothing to do with the total amount of taxes.

      So, in a way you are correct: Norway is relatively up front in taxing income and raising money in other ways. Poor research in the original article though.

    6. Re:is 40% high by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      That isnt quite the way it is in the U.S. Above a certain size a corporation can buy into the tax breaks that are said to lower our "actual corporate tax rates" below officially being the highest in the world.

      Small to mid-sized businesses generally dont get any of those breaks. America has a very hostile tax environment for small to mid-sized businesses. The highest rates in the world. These arent VAT taxes but they are quite similar in actuality. A tax on profits might as well be a tax on added-value.

      The U.S. tax code is abysmal. Its just one big collection of rewards and punishments really. Disgusting.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    7. Re:is 40% high by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Sure. Your car registration is SUCH a burden. If that's all that you can think of then your argument is pants.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    8. Re:is 40% high by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually being a small business is very advantageous. While "rates" may be high, you can deduct pretty much anything. This is in stark contrast to an individual wage earner that has to bear nearly 100% of work related costs.

      Corporate tax rates even for small businesses are only relevant to profits after all expenses including wages.

      Even lush bennies for low paid employees can be seen as a tax dodge for the business owner.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    9. Re: is 40% high by mikael · · Score: 3, Informative

      Entry level graduate earns around 250K NOK (Norwegian Kronor). Senior Engineer earns around 550K NOK.

      Mobile smartphones are between 5000 and 6000 NOK. Mobile network connection seemed to come in two bills of about 1500NOK each. Electricity bills were split up into network/distribution and production but didn't cost more than 600NOK/quarter. Internet access costs would be subsidized by the employer. Weekly shopping is around 800NOK for one person (Meny, Rema1000) but use-by-dates were only a couple of days, as everything is imported from the rest of Europe.

      There's a vehicle import duty of 25K NOK, so everyone usually ends up buying the high-end range of cars and vans - with large touchscreen at the center of the vehicle. Homes started at 250K NOK. Student places rent for 700NOK, luxury apartments 1500NOK.

      You have all the catalog brand names: H&M's, Dressmann. Narvesen is the equivalent of WH Smiths and convenience stores. They stock newspapers, confectionary, magazines as well as hot food like hot dogs wrapped in bacon.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    10. Re: is 40% high by ortholattice · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Bullshit.

      Between city, state and federal taxes I pay about 47 cents per dollar earned. That isn't good or advantageous. It's fucking crushing. I could hire 12 more people with even a 10% tax reduction.

      Let's see: 10% of 47 cents is 4.7 cents per dollar reduction. If we assume each employee costs $50K with benefits (probably low balling it), 12 employees would be $600K, which is 4.7% of your net income before taxes. That means your income before taxes is about $13 million and after taxes $6.8 million. So why can't you hire the 12 more now, especially if each employee produces more than they are paid, making you even richer? Are you having trouble making ends meet on $6.8 million a year?

    11. Re:is 40% high by Gavagai80 · · Score: 2

      You can't deduct things from your profit. You deduct expenses from revenue to get the profit you're taxed on. Taxing a company's revenue makes zero sense unless you want to randomly bankrupt all low-margin businesses.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    12. Re: is 40% high by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hello dumbass, my old friend. YouR logical fallacy, which in this case is probably deliberate deception, is the lie that there is only income tax. Of course, not all taxes are income taxes. There are taxes on property, right? Did you know that businesses get punished for having inventory? Yes, those trucks running inefficient LTL routes? That's because inventory is taxed. So no, that's not all income taxes. Grow up and get past your idiot DNC supplied talking points. They're lies.

    13. Re:is 40% high by CanadianRealist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't forget to figure in your health care costs. That's a service which most (first world) governments provide, using money paid by taxes.

    14. Re:is 40% high by Major+Blud · · Score: 1

      like driver's licenses which need to be renewed for some reason a

      I can't speak for everyone, but I don't look anything like the picture that was on my drivers license 20 years ago.

      --
      If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
    15. Re:is 40% high by PPH · · Score: 1

      Which is why the IRS will rape you if you are a sole proprietor contractor. Particularly with only a few or one client.

      Even lush bennies for low paid employees

      The IRS gives companies serious tax breaks and leeway on deductions in return for their complicity in enforcing tax regulations on individuals. Actually let your rank and file employees use too many legal tax breaks and your company will get audited into the ground. Lincoln freed the slaves, but our government still isn't happy about seeing people walking around without masters.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    16. Re:is 40% high by Solandri · · Score: 2
      You haven't actually run a small business, have you? Deductions can't increase profit because to get a deduction you have to spend the money on something. So to avoid paying $3 in taxes, you have to spend $10 on something. Meaning you've got a net loss of $7 ($10 spent, $3 saved on taxes). You do gain whatever you bought with the $10, but if your business didn't need it, that's an inefficient use of funds.

      Or to put it another way, why pay $10 for benefits for low-paid employees to get a $3 tax deduction, when you can just pay the employees $10 more (making them no longer low-paid and thus presumably much happier) and get the exact same $3 tax deduction because wages are also a deductible expense? (The actual answer is payroll taxes - Social Security and Medicare are subtracted from wages, but not from benefits. Nothing to do with deductions.)

      Actually being a small business is very advantageous. While "rates" may be high, you can deduct pretty much anything. This is in stark contrast to an individual wage earner that has to bear nearly 100% of work related costs.

      • When you're an employee and earn a wage, you pay income tax on what you make.
      • When you own a company, you get paid two ways:
        • You earn a wage, which the company deducts as an expense and you pay income tax on, just like the employee wage owner.
        • And you pay corporate tax on the company's profit, plus income tax when you pay yourself with that profit. (In general; the reality is a lot more complicated.)

      That last bullet point means unless you can figure out a way to pay zero corporate tax, the small business owner's overall tax rate is always higher than a wage earner's. This double taxation of small business owners compared to a wage earner discouraged wage earners from making the leap and starting their own business. Why start a business and incur all the headaches that come along with it just so you could be taxed more than when you're an employee? So to remove this impediment to the average Joe starting a small business, the government made LLCs (limited liability corporations). LLCs are pass-through entities for tax purposes - the LLC isn't taxed. Instead, any money the company makes is automatically considered your income. So you only end up paying income tax on it, not both corporate and income tax. (Partnerships are another option, but involve a lot more bookkeeping which generally isn't worth it unless you're actually partners with someone in the business and want the protections it provides.)

      And if a wage-earner is paying for work-related expenses (isn't being reimbursed by their employer), those expenses are deductible on their personal income taxes.

    17. Re:is 40% high by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2

      Yeah, we're not the highest, for the G20 we're 3rd place behind Argentina and Indonesia when it comes to average effective corporate tax rate.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    18. Re: is 40% high by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      He's pointing out that a small business is a very efficient vehicle for co-mingling business and personal expenses.

      Which is also a great way to have Mr. IRS Agent come, audit, and slap you for improper deductions, back taxes, and tons of penalties!

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    19. Re:is 40% high by FaxeTheCat · · Score: 1

      Property tax (private) is part of the stated 40% (which I have never been close to. More like 33-35%).
      There is no gift tax or inheritance tax.
      Also note that the tax inclued health insurance, and public pension (although most people have a private one paid by the employer on top of the public one).

    20. Re:is 40% high by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >"There is no gift tax or inheritance tax."

      Someone should correct the Wikipedia page, then.

    21. Re:is 40% high by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      See, "average effective" meaning "yeah, not the tax rate"
      ,br> The point is that not everyone gets those tax deductions. Startups in this country pay the highest rate in the world no matter how many times you try to refute it with bullshit.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    22. Re:is 40% high by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Huh? I was trying to support your position. I don't think many people consider Argentina and Indonesia "hotbeds of innovative startups"... We're way overtaxed compared to most of the developed world... Oh, and average means the ACTUAL tax rate paid. Marginal rates puts us at the top, but most companies do get at least a few deductions (and I know about small businesses - I've started and sold 4 so far, and have two more going, one a fairly large VC play in SF) which helps get us to "only the 3rd most taxed companies in the world" rather than number one!

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    23. Re:is 40% high by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      I can't speak for everyone, but I can't remember the last time I cared what the photo on the government issued card I shouldn't really need for much of anything looked like.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    24. Re:is 40% high by Major+Blud · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you don't drive. Good for you. Are you suggesting that people that do drive shouldn't need a license?

      --
      If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
  10. same goes for US government jobs by mapkinase · · Score: 2

    if you are a federal worker, your salary is not a secret.

    Except that in contrast to Norway it is harder to find

    --
    I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    1. Re:same goes for US government jobs by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      Interesting tidbit:

      "While Federal employees' salaries are considered public information, FederalPay does not by default display pay information for employees earning below $100,000 per year who are not in the highest paid 10% of their agency."

      I found this by looking for a random name and seeing that for some name the contents of Salary column is replaced by "View Employee Profile" link

      Once you click on that link, you see the whole table of salary related information with all cells "REDACTED" (like in the movies).

      Then it displays the quoted explanation.

      I wonder if government requested that feature from what I presume is independent organization or they came up with it themselves....

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  11. $50k by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

    In Slashdot salaries aren't secret too. I made $50k in Silicon Valley in IT with bonuses. What about you?

    1. Re:$50k by thereitis · · Score: 2

      A mechanical engineer, eh. Not exactly rocket science.

    2. Re: $50k by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yet you are only happy when you get to brag about it. Curious

    3. Re:$50k by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      I make nothing at all, running a business is like that.

      --
      You can't handle the truth.
    4. Re:$50k by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      I make about $1.7m/yr between my porn star and supercar test driver gigs.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  12. Re:Only works if they stay a "high trust society" by Rockoon · · Score: 1

    The presumption that all immigrants are trying to melt into the pot seems to be prevalent in the correct-speech world. However there doesn't seem to be any reason to believe that refugees in particular want to melt away into your pot. Refugees didn't intend to be in your pot.

    Refugee camps are not internment camps. We used to know what to do when a million fleeing people showed up on our borders.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  13. I pay close to 30% by waspleg · · Score: 1

    with 0 transparency. When will the US catch up? I would love to see this shit here. There would be CEO blood in the streets and it would be glorious.

    1. Re:I pay close to 30% by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Obviously actual CEO blood in the streets would be bad. Unemployed CEOs due to their employees demanding their corporation hire someone less focused on self-enrichment, however, would be good.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    2. Re:I pay close to 30% by Paul+Carver · · Score: 1

      Since when are CEO salaries not public in the US? Are you talking about pretentious small or medium sized business owners who call themself CEO to feel bigger? When I hear CEO I generally assume we're talking about a publicly owned company. Are there publicly owned companies that don't report executive compensation? I thought it was mandatory. I certainly know the total compensation of the executives of the company I work for from reading the SEC filings.

      I'd be shocked if the union reps negotiating contracts don't know exactly what our top execs are paid and would not hesitate to use it to motivate the union members if it made sense to do so.

  14. Re:Only works if they stay a "high trust society" by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Scandinavian countries have an extremely low crime rate.
    Also they value assimilation for immigrants very high.

    On the other hands immigrants are received with a relatively high standard of living. The total amount accepted by those countries is relatively small.

    No idea why you think those immigrants would suddenly start robbing 'rich natives'.

    Robbing anyone,regardless of rich or native, is a 'ticket home' ... from what ever hell they came (after serving prison time).

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  15. Yes by Ryanrule · · Score: 1

    The rich never want you to learn about or talk about money or finance.

  16. It's already been stated by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 5, Interesting

    But it would go a long way in calling bullshit on an employer who tells you no on a payraise because " budgets are tight " all the while paying each of their execs a yearly bonus that exceeds your lifetime income.

    This sort of transparency would cause a great deal of discomfort for those companies who regularly lie to their employees.

    In fact, those companies would find it difficult to keep any employees and, in the end, might have difficulty being a company at all when all of their talent leaves because of it.

    The Income Inequality gap in the US is so wide now, this level of transparency would likely cause a great deal of anger at best.

    An insane amount of violence at worst.

  17. I'm Norwegian but I've also lived in the US by Terje+Mathisen · · Score: 5, Informative

    As the article stated, it used to be that everything was completely open and searchable on the internet for a few years, before that point you had to visit city hall (or the post office) and manually search through huge books.

    The current setup is actually very nice, in that the transparency goes both ways:

    In order to be allowed to access any tax records you first have to use the same two-factor authentication you would use to deliver your own tax return, and if you then look at any tax return except your own, the person you looked up will be notified that you did so.

    I.e. if I think my neighbors are spending too much money and want to check what they have declared, they will immediately be told that I did so.

    Terje

    --
    "almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"
    1. Re:I'm Norwegian but I've also lived in the US by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Someone should set up an exchange website where people can do look ups for other people in exchange for them doing requests on their behalf. All the person being checked knows is that some random person they don't know made a request.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:I'm Norwegian but I've also lived in the US by Terje+Mathisen · · Score: 2

      That's actually a good idea, or it would have been if Norwegians hadn't been both trusting and trustworthy.

      I.e. there have been several international comparisons where Norway end up with very high productivity, supposedly because the fact that we can (at least mostly) trust people.

      My favorite story is the time when I lost my wallet on the bus and someone who did the cleaning for the bus company found it and phoned me three weeks later (it had gotten stuck between the seat cushions.)

      --
      "almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"
    3. Re:I'm Norwegian but I've also lived in the US by unixisc · · Score: 1

      I.e. if I think my neighbors are spending too much money and want to check what they have declared, they will immediately be told that I did so.

      Terje

      How about doing it this way - the moment you checked up on anybody's salary, not only would they be notified that you looked it up, they would also as a bonus be told what you earn! And let them do whatever they like w/ that information

    4. Re:I'm Norwegian but I've also lived in the US by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Not so much a 'revenge' thing as much as a 'minding one's own business' thing. In other words, if you seek out details of my salary, then I should automatically get similar details on yours, w/o having to even ask. As long as the requester follows the golden rule, everything is fine!

  18. Re: Taxing a company's revenue makes zero sense by PPH · · Score: 1

    Came to post this. Left satisfied.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  19. Re:And that's a good thing? by PPH · · Score: 1

    But in the USA, we all aspire to move to the big end of town. If you live in a socialist economy you might be content with never moving up. That's the 'bucket of crabs' analogy at work.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  20. Re:trust and confidence by PPH · · Score: 1

    can be changed if people wanted to

    Not so much in collectivist cultures. Peer pressure will have most people voting against their own self interests.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  21. Re:Fake News by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

    In the tax reports the reported income is used for the tax calculation.

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  22. Sounds like a free market to me by rbrander · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...and any time pricing information is concealed, it's NOT a free market.

    You know the only people who WANT a free market, really want one? Small actors who have no leverage. The BEST deal you can get when you're small is a fair one, as produced by a free market. Every large actor (the company vs you, at salary time, say) wants a closed market, so they can use their size advantage. The Company knows EVERY salary in the company (and they always want to know what you were paid at every previous job, when you apply) while you only know your own, at negotiation time. That's a huge advantage for them, which they always wish to preserve.

    1. Re:Sounds like a free market to me by Paul+Carver · · Score: 1

      My employer (a fortune 100 company) provides every employee with a personalized annual report showing the target salary range for their job title and exactly where their current salary falls relative to the low and high ends of the range. The internal job listings show the target salary for every posted position with the geographic variation for different pay for the same job title in different regions of the US.

      Is this unique? It's a company that gets a lot of hate posts every time it's mentioned on slashdot. Maybe only companies that get a lot of hate make enough profit to treat rank and file employees well.

  23. The millionaire next door by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

    There are a lot (or at least more than a few) people who have significant assets but don't flaunt them in any way. Living in the little house on the corner, driving the ten year old car, etc.

    Should these people be publicly "outed" so they become targets for everyone from burglars to scam artists to kidnappers? "Lets kidnap Mrs. Smith's grandkid -- she can afford to pay a big ransom!"

    --
    If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
  24. Re:sense of community by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    A sense of community is easier in a homogeneous society. People are more willing to help their neighbors if their neighbors look and think like they do.

    Scandinavians are not as happy to help the poor when they are Syrian and Somali refugees.

  25. Re:sense of community by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Norway actually has a very low population density. The one in USA is 6 times higher and Japan 20 times.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  26. We Need That Here by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    Having that transparency in the US would prevent all kinds of crimes. For example the con man who wants you to make a bad investment could not pretend to be a successful investor. And if we combine that with going to electronic money the bad guys have no way of using their money as your spending needs to be no higher than your income. You just can't make those under the table bribes any more. The truth, the light of day, preventing lies and crimes all sounds like a pretty Christian way to live to me. Those that are serious about the Jewish faith or Islam should embrace this as well. But I will bet they will not. Hypocracy is a powerful demon in itself.

  27. Two things are missing by stikves · · Score: 1

    This lacks two properties to be useful, especially in the US.

    1. Rich people do not need a "salary", even an "income". They already have "wealth", and "unrealized gains" from their investments. i.e.: they might have a mansion, and own stock in a large company, and receive zero salary but still sustain themselves, their heirs, and maybe three more generations without any additional "salary" (i.e: income tax). In addition to "income", "wealth" needs to be public as well. (But that will attract all kinds of thieves, literal ones, and also "long forgotten family members").

    2. The real discrepancy is between companies, and job levels. Knowing another company in another town giving larges salaries will not help, if you do not properly calculate the cost of living, or the skills required to switch jobs. Of course knowing that the CEO has been paid a bonus, while people are taking a paycut is valuable, but even that will not be very useful. People need proper mobility, and access to education to switch jobs, and climb the job levels. Otherwise it will be idle gossip.

  28. Re:40% high? by FaxeTheCat · · Score: 1

    The income tax covers state and local income tax. It also includes health insurance and pensions (although most have additional pensions covered by employer).

  29. Re: um, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Holy shit, you guys elected Trump. How can you use "imbred elites" without sarcasm?!

  30. Re: um, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Cause trump was elected, he didn't get his job from his father fucking his cousin and claiming the child had divine right?

  31. Re:sense of community by unixisc · · Score: 1

    Translation: they are not as happy to help those bent on not just leeching off their generosity, but raping them as well

  32. Re:sense of community by unixisc · · Score: 1

    Is it that low if you consider only the habitable parts, such as the south of the country? Most of the north is just mountains or snow. I'm assuming not much of the country's population lives north of Trondheim, which would be what - some 60% of that country's area?

  33. Re:And that's a good thing? by Gussington · · Score: 1

    But in the USA, we all aspire to move to the big end of town.

    Everyone aspires to moving up, it's just whether you allow others an equal opportunity to also move up too. America out of all western nations seems to be one of the worst at this https://www.oecd.org/eco/growt...

  34. Re:um, by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 2

    As the US slides further left

    Uhhhh, what?

    --
    Eat the rich.
  35. Re:sense of community by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    It does mot really matter, Norway has only 5.xM inhabitants ... most obviously live in the few big cities.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  36. EU Privacy? by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    What about these privacy laws that I keep reading about on /. that are so wonderful in the EU?

    1. Re:EU Privacy? by dave420 · · Score: 1

      If Norway was in the EU you'd have a point.

    2. Re:EU Privacy? by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      So I guess I have a point? https://europa.eu/european-uni... . Norway is a Member of the Schengen border-free area. It's not clear if they are or not. From what they say on this page it seems they are subject to their laws.

  37. fourty percent huh by KingBenny · · Score: 1

    in a country that has oil fields? in soviet hellgium if you have a business mowing lawns, you start earning for yourself in august, thats how much taxes ... not counting the quartelies i suppose, you dont have to believe my love for the place, ASK someone who works shyte like that here so 40% in a rich country doesnt seem that bad from where i stand

    --
    Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
  38. Re:Only works if they stay a "high trust society" by dave420 · · Score: 1

    I like how you made a massive inaccurate generalisation of desperate people in order to excuse bad behaviour towards them. That was a lovely touch.