this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2025
377 points (99.5% liked)

World News

47777 readers
3434 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Denmark is set to have the highest retirement age in Europe, after lawmakers voted to raise it to 70.

Parliamentarians passed a bill mandating the rise on Thursday, with 81 votes in favor and 21 against.

The new law will apply to people born after December 31, 1970. The current retirement age is 67 on average, but it can go up to 69 for those born on January 1, 1967, or later.

The rise is needed in order to be able to “afford proper welfare for future generations,” employment minister Ane Halsboe-Jørgensen said in a press release Thursday.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -5 points 1 day ago (5 children)

How are you gonna stop "the rich" from simply taking all of their digitally stored wealth and leaving the country that taxes them?

Not disagreeing with you necessarily, i'm just curious. With borders being more for show than anything and the ability to purchase a passport from countries with low or no income tax, how do you propose to stop them?

This is where the nationalists win against the globalists in all types of debate. They atleast have a strategy, even if it leads to other humanitarian problems. You have to start giving more of a shit about your own community, either by becoming rich and giving it back to the community or let the rich leave and deal with the aftermath of it.

[–] frank@sopuli.xyz 19 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I hate this argument.

If they're not paying their fair share of taxes then leaving is beneficial. It's like saying "yeah but if you ask the thieves to pay for their stolen goods they might leave the store"

[–] elflakoinri@lemmynsfw.com 5 points 22 hours ago

Totally agree with you, im 41 and all my live i head this shit excuse innmy country that the billonaires takes all their money and fly, so we need to shit all the people only to save a small group of billonaires for nothing, they never fly away, it more expensive than taxes but, you know, the assholes thinks that defending billonaires could give them money

[–] teslasaur@lemmy.world 0 points 23 hours ago

Its not so much an argument as it is the logical conclusion to open borders. They can leave if they want. Especially if they haven't broken any laws. They simply leave when a law gets voted through.

[–] FishFace@lemmy.world -3 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

What if they're paying their share/most of their share of taxes now, but a change pushes them into not doing so? These things ar enot all-or-nothing.

[–] frank@sopuli.xyz 4 points 22 hours ago

In something like Denmark's case, I could see an argument. In the US? Rich people pay nearly nothing, so I think forcing them to pay taxes is a slam dunk

[–] 0tan0d@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They never leave, that's propaganda from the rich class (Massachusetts passed a millionaires tax and I saw in person this to be a bunch of bologna). They obviously live there for reasons other than taxes.

[–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -3 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

They definitely do.

During the financial crisis in the 90's, Sweden was close to defaulting due to the rich moving their wealth out of Sweden.

[–] 0tan0d@lemmy.world 3 points 21 hours ago

I would want to understand that data, as it was a lot easier to just say things are happening in the 90s than today. The rich tried to say this would happen 3 years ago too. However, in the current police state in America where there is no privacy for anyone, we have a concrete example of raising the taxes on the parasite class and there was no data to back this claim.

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 day ago

it's not an easy thing to solve, and a large part of it comes down to not having a country where greedy selfish assholes make all the rules and hoodwink the populace into supporting policy that completely the opposite of in their own best interest

i don't know about other countries, but investing more in the "common good" has basically become a pejorative where i live, where people who benefit the most from publicly funded resources whine the loudest about "socialism"

it may be too late. there may be no solution, other than the late 1700s french sort

[–] HikingVet@lemmy.ca 7 points 23 hours ago

Why haven't they already?

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 4 points 23 hours ago

How are you gonna stop "the rich" from simply taking all of their digitally stored wealth and leaving the country that taxes them?

Their wealth is digitally stored, but their business isn't. A car dealership or a Walmart are physical things that they can't take with them unless they close up shop entirely and miss out on the revenue, and those are taxed too.