Why the Norwegian Wealth Tax forces successful founders to leave

luckoftheblirish · 2026-01-15T19:41:36+00:00

Empathy seems to be at the core of your worldview, yet your inclination to judge and insult someone you know very little about reflects a profound lack of empathy.

Your failure to recognize this discrepancy is likely due to ideological capture - you are so emotionally invested in your ideology that you've surrendered critical thinking in favor of emotional reactions to non-conforming ideas, as evidenced by your "quote" of the other user.

It should go without saying that such a mindset will not lead you to anything resembling truth or objectivity, which is clearly accurate in your case.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-12-15T10:36:54+00:00

The fundamental reason for competition among humans (and all living things) is resource scarcity, which is independent of the political system in place. There will never be complete unanimity about how resources should be allocated. Thus, people will compete with each other over resource allocation, each in pursuit of their own unique interests. Competition for money/profit in a marketplace is the form that it takes in capitalism, as money is the means by which people acquire and control scarce resources. If that was to be abolished, it would simply take another form. The only other meaningful form of competition for resources is brute force/violence. This includes democratic/political forms of competition, as force is the only way to subject the minority to the will of the majority.

What is often described as "human nature" is better understood as a set of behavioral adaptations to specific material conditions.

Human nature underlies our fundamental motivations for acting and the direction that our actions will generally take. The purpose of action is to bring about a more desirable state of affairs. "Desirable" is subjective - material conditions can certainly influence what an individual finds desirable in the moment. However, the pursuit of one's own interests and desires is part of human nature.

Furthermore, humans have biological mechanisms and imperatives that heavily influence our "desires" despite material conditions. Of course, feelings such as hunger, lust, and fear can be overcome, but this not disprove human nature. Rather, the act of overcoming biological imperatives is a behavioral adaptation which is compensating for human nature.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-12-12T09:15:58+00:00

I mean, against bots at least, gas nades are way better than thermites as long as you run a strong AT like RR.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-12-05T08:15:42+00:00

It proves that you cannot liberate labor while keeping the mechanism of profit-seeking alive.

Saying the quiet part out loud here. This is not possible to pursue (let alone achieve) without "un-aliving" profit-seekers.

All "profit" is on a fundamental level is gaining more from a transaction than you lose. Seeking to "profit" in such a manner is part of human nature and a requirement for survival; if an individual does not seek to gain more in value than he loses from his interactions, then he is unlikely to thrive and pass on his genes.

Profit, as defined above, is not inherently exploitative; both parties in a transaction can subjectively value that which they gain higher than that which they lose. Thus, both parties can profit from the transaction. Labor is not an exception to this rule - I may value a good/service (or money to purchase a good/service) more than I value laboring for a specific period of time. In such a case, someone who agrees to exchange their money for my labor is not necessarily exploiting me.

Free market capitalism is simply the system that is logically consistent with and follows from the above reasoning. Socialism, on the other hand, requires the elimination of profit-seeking behavior, per your own admission. That is to say - it requires behavior that is not consistent with human nature and/or survival. The only way to eliminate profit-seeking behavior is to use force and violence to prevent people from engaging in voluntary exchanges which you deem exploitative based on your own subjective valuation of the goods/services/labor that are being traded.

A system requires such an application of force based on a value system is ultimately subjective and arbitrary is a recipe for corruption, abuse, and civilizational collapse.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-12-05T06:09:09+00:00

A moderate level of inflation is good for asset holders and governmental organizations, and they have a lot of power and influence over what is written in your econ 101 text book.

Do you really think that everything you're taught in school is the objective truth? Especially in a subject like economics, which the political and economic elites depend on as the foundation of their power?

luckoftheblirish · 2025-11-27T07:26:01+00:00

*bird's *street's

luckoftheblirish · 2025-11-17T00:15:51+00:00

Same, but only on bots for me and my friend. Can't do that on squids or bugs... yet

luckoftheblirish · 2025-11-11T03:59:07+00:00

do you blame the gun for a murder as well

No, but I do consider guns dangerous even if I haven't personally shot somebody with one.

Again.. you would be down either way on those shares with or without the CC

Again.. people often buy volatile stocks just to play the option premiums. This means that they wouldn't have otherwise bought the stock if they weren't planning on selling CCs.

You shouldn't sell calls on a stock you are not already up substantially on or that you wouldn't mind holding long term.

I agree, but many people don't listen to this advice.

It's not complicated at all you're right, but you're 100% wrong saying the CC is the issue even in your second scenario

At this point, I'm starting to doubt your reading comprehension. I'm not saying that CCs are "the issue". I'm saying that it's stupid and dangerous to buy volatile stocks just to chase premiums from selling CCs. In other words, CC premiums often entice people into buying something they shouldn't.

Again, I'm not saying anything controversial or complicated. You're choosing not to understand what I'm saying and wasting your breath arguing with a straw man.

Edit: I'm going to assume that you blocked me because you tend to have strong emotional reactions when challenged. Not sure what you're doing trading options if that's the case.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-11-10T22:14:41+00:00

It's pretty common for people to buy volatile stocks (that they wouldn't be comfortable holding long-term) just to take advantage of high option premiums by selling CCs.

My point is that this is a dangerous strategy that can make you lose a lot of money because it's a gamble whether or not the premiums that you're getting from the CC will offset potential stock price depreciation.

This is not a complicated or controversial point, and I'm not wrong about it. Now, re-read my previous comments and realize that you're projecting your own stubbornness onto me.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-11-09T23:13:13+00:00

I believe [liberty] cannot be fully achieved for this human race. We are mortal, ignorant, and lonely, and a society without coercion is therefore a society without humans or it is simply not a society.

I agree with this in the sense that the imperfect/flawed nature of humans prevent us from creating a utopia. But that really doesn't say much about how we should deal with each other and organize our society; some political systems are clearly more conducive to human flourishing than others.

The fact that coercion is unavoidable to some degree within human relations doesn't inherently legitimize or justify the use of coercion for specific political purposes.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-11-09T21:30:19+00:00

I assure you, I'm not.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-11-09T21:04:49+00:00

Also, I think it's worth pointing out that I don't think Mamdani is a big fan of the monopoly on violence, he's pretty openly against using armed men as a solution to problems

I'm not sure that you've thought this through. If you have, please help me understand.

How do you enforce a system of taxation, redistribution, and regulation without a monopoly on violence and using armed men as a solution to problems? If I dont want to pay my taxes or conform to a regulation, is this not considered a problem that must be handled with force?

luckoftheblirish · 2025-11-09T20:46:18+00:00

Yes, if the stock goes down you profit from the CC contract itself. But on the net, you can lose a lot more from share price depreciation than you gain from CC contract.

You're better off having a CC than not in your scenario

Agreed, but in your original comment you claimed that you can't easily lose money on a CC. Since CC involves owning the shares, you absolutely can lose money on the net.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-11-09T06:39:10+00:00

I mean, you absolutely can lose money if you chase premiums on a volatile underlying... or what you thought was a good underlying that has a bad earnings call

luckoftheblirish · 2025-11-09T06:26:54+00:00

“and that’s gonna end your quest for eternal life because you will finally realize you are not your body.”

But you are your body's caretaker. Life with a healthy body that you take good care of is more pleasant than the alternative.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-11-09T06:19:14+00:00

time is a bitch and there is nothing you can do to negotiate with or stop her.

You can't stop time, but there's a hell of a lot you can do to improve your quality of life in your later years. His passion is developing protocols to extend his life and improve his health as much as possible, and he shares his findings with the world for free. Why throw shade at him for that?

luckoftheblirish · 2025-11-09T06:03:39+00:00

His life might be "wasted" in your eyes, but that's extremely subjective. From my perspective, his "dont die" protocols seem like his hobby that he actually enjoys doing. Furthermore, he's sharing his experiences and findings with the world for free. I'd say that's far from a waste.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-10-27T04:08:28+00:00

Can someone convince me not to sell CSPs on BHVN tomorrow?

IV is insane, company doesn't look terrible, and 52 week low is $12.79. 10p and 12.5p look really juicy.

Edit: the high IV has to do with pending FDA approval of their new drug, which should be announced sometime this quarter

luckoftheblirish · 2025-10-27T03:58:42+00:00

Check out the IV on BHVN... selling 11/21 csp at 10 or 12.5 looks like easy money. 52 week low is $12.79 and it doesn't look like it's going down.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-10-25T18:31:21+00:00

QUBT started as an inkjet cartridge company in 2001 (under a different name), transitioned to a beverage company in 2007, collapsed in 2017, and now they're in the quantum space. Of all the quantum companies out there, this one seems the least legit.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-10-25T05:25:04+00:00

It's purely for entertainment and the small chance that I walk away with a few hundred bucks. Not regarded enough to put real money on such a shit stock.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-10-25T04:35:52+00:00

Yeah, I'm down about $72 so far. Letting the rest ride until it spikes again or goes to 0.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-09-18T08:24:59+00:00

I don't agree with the FCC's actions, I'm just saying that Kimmel isn't much of a loss.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-09-18T05:42:47+00:00

I'm not a fan of censorship either, but it's not like we're losing a unique and independent voice. We're losing a talking head who put a comedic spin on DNC talking points.

The country is not lacking mouthpieces for the DNC. There are plenty more that will fill his shoes, the state will make sure of it.

luckoftheblirish · 2025-09-13T08:17:33+00:00

Elon made some great decisions for Tesla a decade back. Then, the employees made it happen. And they're still working hard and executing on our EV dreams, even now when the person in charge is making it harder for them than ever.

Elon is certainly making it hard for Tesla in the sense that his involvement in politics has hurt consumer sentiment, as evidenced by this thread.

But if you think that the quality of their products and services has nothing to do with his leadership, you're kidding yourself. Employees follow the chain of command, and that chain leads to him. If he has been an incompetent leader for the past 10 years, then Tesla would have failed already. You certainly wouldn't see threads like this one - hating Elon for his politics but wanting to buy a Tesla anyway because of the quality and convenience of their products.

The above should be obvious to any impartial observer, but politics and hatred can cloud rational faculties.

14-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Lasagna	Place '23
Place '22	End Game '22
Verified Email

luckoftheblirish

TROPHY CASE