PoIitiikkaпurkkaus (Οsa 2)

[Sndra]

What has increasingly started to worry about the state of the country is that when structural problems are not addressed and money is poured here and there, the public sector, in its home offices, continues to swell with its salary harmonizations etc., how much further will those truly important basic services be run down.

Even 10 years ago, when discussing serious illnesses with relatives and acquaintances, it felt like one received good and fast treatment, whereas now it feels as if doctors, especially concerning older people, intend to delay the start of treatment until it is finally too late.

I truly do not want to believe that this is the case, but the start of cancer treatments for elderly acquaintances has been delayed and delayed for so long, and ultimately it has indeed been too late, that it is difficult to come up with a medical explanation for this. Very difficult.

What if salary harmonizations, which were the height of foolishness, had not been made, and even the Centre Party’s administrative bureaucracy had been halved, would treatment still be better and faster?

And as a disclaimer, this would not have been about experimental million-dollar treatments, but rather basic ones, which of course also cost a lot, but if a person would otherwise presumably have another 5-10 years of life left, it is quite a cruel thought that treatments are no longer given while money is burned here and there.

[Perttu_Hamalainen]

The Left Alliance’s main theme

A little over a week ago, Koskela wondered at her party’s shadow budget press conference why other parties had not adopted the millionaire tax, as it would be “quite moderate” according to Koskela. The millionaire tax would be 1.0 percent and would only be paid on assets over one million euros.

– Hardly anyone would move out of the country because of it, Koskela said.

According to Koskela, the millionaire tax would generate about one billion euros annually for the state treasury.

Oh, for heaven’s sake. If implemented, this tax is the height of absurdity. Rich people are needed in Finland, where there is a dire shortage of private capital. Koskela seriously underestimates the willingness to move. With 5 million in assets, one can get a free apartment in the south or wherever one wants to move. In 10 years, a 500,000 apartment is paid for.

Koskela, with her sharp mind, could calculate how much tax has been paid on average before assets reach 5 million or even 1 million. A conservative average for accumulating one million in assets would be around 400,000. Well, this is certainly not enough, and one would still have to pay 10,000 annually. The money would clink into the state treasury, but for many entrepreneurs, assets might be tied up in their own company and its mathematical value. An owner of a five-million-euro company would thus have to withdraw an extra 50,000 to pay the tax. We wisely know that 50,000 is not enough; one would have to withdraw more to cover capital gains tax or income tax. So, you pay tax so you can pay tax. According to the Left Alliance, companies should invest to develop and create jobs. Investment does not reduce the mathematical value of a company, so the tax payable by the owner does not decrease. I see the tax reducing investments in Finland, where they are needed more urgently than perhaps ever before. Quite a few private entrepreneurs reach a mathematical value of one million. A company might be finishing a heavy investment phase, so that 10,000 or 15,000 one has to withdraw is not a trivial sum. The undersigned will move the books to other lands immediately if a tax of this kind is passed.

[SentinVenyttaja1]

In addition, the fact that “poor” millionaires will likely arrange their net worth below the limit, e.g., by buying their own home (or upgrading to a more expensive one) or e.g., by leveraging their investments sufficiently, as interest is also tax-deductible. Furthermore, of course, channeling assets below the taxable limit to their heirs, buying a home for their use,… A completely stillborn idea, in my opinion.

[tusinakassa]

I personally welcome a wealth tax. As the wealthy are the only ones who still have anything to give in this economic situation, and money must be found somewhere. The tax (and generally all taxes except VAT) is in any case voluntary for those whose assets are in an easily realizable form. Companies should be completely excluded from this, and a clause should be added stating that the tax is not levied if one owns a company that pays corporate tax.

[evilK]

@tusinakassa

I, for one, welcome a wealth tax. The wealthy are the only ones who still have anything to give in this economic situation, and that money has to be found somewhere. Tax (in general, all taxes except VAT) is every

Have you considered that the wealthy are also the only ones who can afford to invest and spend more significantly? Is it worth encouraging them to move out of the country for that small amount of tax?

Owning a company is not related to taxation in any way; indeed, everyone on this forum owns several domestic companies, albeit with a small stake.

Taxes are already collected quite sufficiently; it’s the expenditure side that is the problem here.

[SentinVenyttaja1]

@tusinakassa

I myself welcome the wealth tax. Because the wealthy are the only ones who still have anything to give in this economic situation, and money must be found from somewhere. The tax (all taxes in general except VAT) is in any case voluntary for those whose assets are easily realizable. Companies should be completely excluded from this, and a clause should be added stating that the tax is not levied if one owns a company that pays corporate tax.

Even with that, one “could live” with that too, meaning that investments are sufficiently placed within the company and the millionaire tax is avoided.

Otherwise, the proposed means for balancing public finances seem to heavily emphasize increasing revenues, rather than decreasing expenditures. Speaking of the latter, a counter-argument often arises that healthcare, education,… would be the first in the firing line, as if there weren’t superfluous (unnecessary, or at least not absolutely necessary) agencies, institutions, organizations, functions, and employees scattered all over the place, considering both the state and municipal sectors.

[Soppakattila86]

@tusinakassa

I personally welcome a wealth tax. The wealthy are the only ones who have anything left to give in this economic situation, and money has to be found somewhere. The tax (in general, all taxes except VAT) is in any case voluntary for those whose assets are in an easily realizable form. Businesses should be completely excluded from this, and a clause should be added stating that the tax is not levied if one owns a company that pays corporate tax.

Could you tell me the value of an electrical installation company that has, for example, 3 installers in addition to the owner, 2 Hiace vans + 10k€ in the account + 5k€ in machinery and supplies?

So, do you want the tax authority to start doing business analysis, or will they buy it from Inderes?

[tusinakassa]

Cuts are constantly being made. Just small, continuous cuts won’t be enough as long as even the most hardened right-winger is committed to keeping all of Finland inhabited. Infrastructure and services are needed, and the law guarantees them even for rural areas, and that’s such an inefficient model that it’s better to get used to taxation.

In my opinion, there’s no great need to fear tax flight. It has been possible since the early 90s, and even the current taxation is certainly enough to motivate those who intend to leave. Or you don’t even have to leave; it’s enough to apply for citizenship from the Caribbean and move into a rental, and you can very effectively escape taxes right here in Finland. That is, if you are wealthy enough not to have to work. Maintaining Finland requires certain value choices, and paying taxes is one of them. I myself trust that taxes will also start to decrease once the eastern border opens and the economy gets back on its feet.

[Sndra]

Hmm, Switzerland and Norway both have a wealth tax, so perhaps it’s worth limiting the worst predictions of national economic ruin and mass migration. Of course, it depends a lot on how that tax would be implemented, what deductions could be made from it, etc. This measure certainly won’t save the country’s situation, but if, for example, that estimated billion were fully used to reduce income tax, the impact on the economy could even be positive.

[micoat]

@stone1

Fortunately, Prime Minister Antti Lindtman will immediately in spring 2027 have the means to get Finland’s economy to 5% growth immediately. E.g., take on a lot of debt, remove all corporate subsidies, a tax increase for the rich so they learn why it’s not worth getting rich in Finland.

Not even the left-wing Marin of the Social Democrats did that, so why would the right-wing Lindtman do it?

And even if he did, would he succeed in surpassing Orpo’s achievements?

People seem to be surprised every time their dream right-wing/left-wing government turns out to be complete crap, then they start pondering that the government wasn’t right-wing/left-wing enough. Indeed.

Somehow, most people fail to notice that the most successful governments have repeatedly been rather centrist compromise governments. That brings continuity; the main thing is that there is at least some kind of line that the parliament can commit to even across electoral terms.

Bouncing from one extreme to another is short-sighted foolishness, and a government with representatives from only one side is inevitably a narrow-minded bunch lacking depth perception.

One fundamental fact every policy-oriented politician should keep in mind: populists belong in the circus, not in government.

[tusinakassa]

Such a company pays salaries and employee-related costs of approximately 200k€ per year, and its turnover hovers around a million. Assuming that the company’s customers are mainly private individuals, it generates tax revenue from VAT alone that is equivalent to the millionaire tax contributions of several single millionaires.

[Sfinski]

@tusinakassa

Since the wealthy are the only ones who still have anything to give in this economic situation, and money must be sought from somewhere.

They are the only ones who have given anything so far. The majority are on the receiving end. Those entitlements must be cut with a heavy hand so that the majority move to the paying side. This country cannot be supported on the shoulders of a few.

[Rokka]

1. Zero tolerance for serious crimes (automatic rejection)

No violent crimes, sexual offenses, terrorism offenses, or organized crime connections – not in the last 15 years.

If found → application rejected immediately.

2. Demonstrable ability to find employment within 12 months

Must include one of the following:

a binding job offer, or

professional qualification in a field with labor shortage (documented).

If no realistic path to employment → no entry.

3. Financial buffer requirement: at least 6 months’ living expenses

Own savings or sponsor’s guarantee covering:

rent

food

basic healthcare costs

other mandatory expenses.

If no money → no entry.

4. Zero tolerance for social security use during the first 12 months

Applicant commits in writing not to claim income support or other immediate livelihood benefits during the first year.

If the condition is not committed to → no entry.

5. Language: mandatory target level in 12 months

Language requirement: Finnish or Swedish at B1 level within two years.

If the level is not achieved, the residence permit will not become permanent.

If the language level does not reach the required level within two years → permit not extended.

6. No serious untreated infectious diseases

Health check before entry; all diseases requiring treatment must be part of a treatment plan.

No discrimination, but untreated infection risk = no entry.

7. Obligation to comply with Finnish law and the official value system

Applicant signs a commitment to:

respect democracy

adhere to gender equality

accept freedom of speech and religion.

If this is not signed → no entry.

8. Mandatory orientation training within 3 months of arrival

The course includes:

Finnish laws

job seeking

social behavior

basic cultural norms

If not participated → residence permit revoked.

9. No signs of violent radicalization or extremist ideology

Intelligence and security assessment.

Does not concern political opinions, but only connections aiming at violence.

If the risk is high → no entry.

10. Assessment of applicant’s ability to live peacefully in Finland

Three-point practical assessment:

no history of violent behavior

no domestic violence convictions

no repeated aggressive behavior towards authorities

If significant risk of disruptive behavior → no entry.

And the most important point

The state does not accept refugees or asylum seekers coming from:

1. Countries where identity cannot be reliably verified (no registers, no biometric systems, no functional cooperation with authorities).

2. Countries classified as high security or radicalization risk countries based on independent international risk indicators.

3. Regions from which applicants statistically have a significantly high risk of committing violent, sexual, or terrorist crimes in the receiving country.

4. Countries that are unable or unwilling to enter into a return agreement, i.e., do not take back their citizens if the application is rejected.

In summary:

the system operates on the principle:

Is the applicant safe?

Is the applicant financially self-sufficient?

Is the applicant willing to work and integrate?

Is the applicant willing to live according to the norms of Finnish society?

If all 10 are met → Welcome.

If even one is not met → No entry.

[evilK]

Here you can see the harsh reality divided into deciles. The top three income deciles are the only net contributors. The 7th decile is around zero, and the remaining 6 are net beneficiaries. Who bears their responsibility?

[tusinakassa]

What is the reason why the lowest income decile receives radically fewer income transfers than the second lowest?

[Lord_Foobar]

Families with children might be more represented in the second decile?

[Opa]

This is what it’s about: too many free riders, too few payers.

Politicians lack the ability to prioritize and to productively manage what the state ought to manage.

In addition to the incompetence of politicians, the challenge is a people who have become lax and cautious in their attitude, despite being partly tenacious. Or has tax socialism blinded their eyes?

Be that as it may, new elections, new speeches, and always new distributable funds attract the economically ignorant like sirens attract Odysseus and honey attracts bees.

[Subotai]

I’ll just leave these here. Let the headlines speak for themselves.

[jps]

@Sndra

Mm, Switzerland and Norway both have a wealth tax, so perhaps it’s worth limiting the worst predictions of national economic destruction and mass migration.

In Norway, the tax benefits of the change seemed to result in a situation very close to ±0, especially as the wealthiest segment voted with their feet.

[Alan_Dorkin_Jr]

Funny picture, but it’s hard for a hundred people to pull a one-meter rope.