If you put a wealth tax on billionaires where you tax them on their total asset value, they’ll simply leave the country and take all of their millions/billions of dollars in taxes every year that they, their companies, and their employees pay, out of the country, leaving you in a much worse position than you’re already in since those are the people that already pay the majority of the countries income taxes etc.
Taxing wealth is a pathetic idea by people who can’t stand others being more successful than them.
You realise that they’ll not leave because it would be A LOT more expensive than just paying their taxes right ? Moving assets is expensive, they will not sell all their property, they will not move their companies. Them moving away is just propaganda for fools like you.
And in any case, they already don’t pay much, even if 1% of them move away, the tax income from the rest will make up for it.
Because it allows them to increase their wealth while lowering their taxes, and the assets and properties are not moving or changing hands (well, they kind of are by moving from holding A to holding B, but the holdings are still entirely within their hands). That’s the expensive part which justifies paying experts.
Look I’m not married to this argument about fleeing capital, I don’t think it’s convincing that everyone will run off to Sweden or whatever. I just think that whatever the solution is will not be the most obvious one that can fit on a t-shirt sold on Gary’s merch page. Imo Gary is a grifter and I don’t appreciate how he denounces the “academics in their ivory tower” while saying he’s got all the answers and it’s so important that the prime minister calls him for help.
I don’t really know the guy, he just pops up on my feed sometimes, so I have no idea if he’s a self important jackass or not. But he raises a lot of important questions with answers we already know to be part of the solution. Raising taxes, destroying inheritance above a certain threshold, the looming threat of extreme Victorian-like inequalities, are all valid points.
Yea I heard the same arguments from people defending Andrew Tate; “he’s got a good message about putting in the work to better yourself”. My response was always that this is basic life stuff you can get from a thousand other people who aren’t sex traffickers. Likewise Gary isn’t the first person to talk about these issues, he isn’t even the thousandth, he’s just the guy who dressed it up with populist messaging and a victim narrative that the elites are trying to silence him.
He has all the hallmarks of being a grifter like the Weinstein brothers, Jordan Peterson, or Tate. Decoding the Gurus have done a few episodes on him being a weirdo that are fun and informative https://youtu.be/Ttrab7AMn-M
Short term cost for long term profit. Look at all the companies that up and left Delaware after what their courts pulled with musks pay packet.
A wealth tax wouldn’t just be a one off thing either, so it might cost them 2x what they’d have to pay to leave, but that has paid itself off after 2 years.
This objection has been brought up repeatedly but these are solvable problems.
Firstly, a lot of assets the wealthy own cannot be transferred out of country. Stock in companies, real estate, etc. The super rich are not rich because they have bank accounts with all of their money that can just disappear overnight, but because they own real things in the real world.
Secondly, economist Gabriel Zucman has proposed a solution to the “they will all take their money and leave.” The USA taxes all citizens on their income no matter where they are in the world. You could simply create a wealth tax that says “if you have wealth over 100 million USD and have lived in this country in the past 5 years, you have to pay the tax no matter where you live for the next X years. (X could be 5, 10, 15, whatever.) If it goes into effect starting in some future date of course people will try to shift assets and move but if you make it retroactive they can’t. Also the tax needs to apply to companies so they can’t have an LLC holding all of their assets tax free neither.
Finally, taxing wealth is not about being jealous or craven that others have more. It’s about survival of society in some form that isn’t “ten people own everything and the rest live in desperate poverty.”
For the ultra wealthy, their wealth can grow passively from compounding interest leaving them will little choice but to continue acquiring assets. If you were given a million dollars every week (that’s roughly 5% annual growth on a billion dollars) you would quickly find that you had lots of money sitting around despite paying off all of your debt, upgrading your house, having fun trips. Eventually you would start using that money to either buy stocks, real estate, etc. Then those things appreciate and your $1M per week begins to climb despite living a lavish lifestyle. It’s just a natural consequence at that point that you buy up and own real world assets at an increasing rate. This means there is less and less available to own for everyone in your community.
Essentially, at a certain point these individuals become financial black holes where their wealth is not only self sustaining but continues to grow and consume things. There is no stop unless society puts brakes on it to limit the growth beyond a certain point.
You’re totally right, thanks for not making me write this comment.
Hey guys, the world’s smartest people are saying tax the multi-millionaires and some of them have spent their life working on this topic. There’s nothing you can bring up that the economists pioneering the modern version of this solution haven’t considered. If you think taxing the wealthy won’t work, for any reason besides they have a whole lot of power and will fight it, than you’re a part of the problem and being propagandized into an apathetic state.
We can win, we will win, it’s not that hard of a problem to solve, we just have to fight for it.
Amazon in the past was often able to overcome threats from state governments by cutting ties with local partners or leaving the state in question. Amazon severed its relationships with affiliates in Colorado due to efforts by the state government to collect sales tax on internet purchases. Amazon has threatened similar action against affiliates in Illinois over the same issue.[47] In February 2011, Amazon announced that it would be closing its Dallas, Texas, distribution center over the sales-tax dispute[145]
That’s got nothing to do with billionaires though. Are you suggesting that businesses that don’t have a billionaire founder never have and can’t do things like that?
Everyone tries to pay as little tax as they can. Big companies are just better at it because they can afford lawyers and financial controllers who know all the laws and how to avoid paying certain taxes. That’s all your link says - Amazon know how to avoid paying taxes based on tax laws.
You know the solution? Fix the tax laws. Don’t hate the player, hate the game.
They don’t provide jobs, they tax jobs. The billionaire’s customers provide the jobs. The workers create the product, and the billionaire collects the money from the customer and pays a fraction of it to the worker. Without the billionaire, the worker could be earning the full value they provide to the customer.
Not false, but something has to give. Billionaires are a drain on society, the conditions that allowed their creation tanked the middle class. They centralize capital in their hand at the downfall of everyone else. A wealth tax is a step forward. Ideally, combined with international agreements with the biggest fiscal havens to not let them run away.
I want to stress how the rise of billionaires is a global phenomenon. In an ideal world, all nations would slowly implement wealth taxes.
Billionaires are generally the wealth creators, not drains. How many people do bezos and musk employ? How much tax do they, their companies, and their employees contribute?
I want you to engage in good faith with this thought experiment.
On one hand, you have Costco - many employees, no billionaires, all employees have good benefits, company pays its taxes. On the other you have Amazon - many employees, one billionaire, many employees are working poors, on snap or similar benefits. Amazon skirts its taxes as much as possible, while US subsidies its employees.
The idea that billionaires would leave the economy that made them billions, the services and amenities that make being a billionaire worthwhille, and all their rich friends, all for a little tax break is pretty ridiculous. They already choose to live in California, New York, and London - expensive places with high taxes - rather than Cayman Islands or South Dakota.
They’re definitely not uprooting the whole corporate campus, moving it away from the skilled workforce it needs, the housing that they need, and the good schools that they want.
Billionaires’ personal wealth isn’t generating any taxable income, anyway, so there’s no income tax to lose if they do leave.
Avoiding a “wealth tax” isn’t just a “little tax break”.
Most wealth is on paper. Billionaires don’t just have a billion dollars of cash. I’m technically a multi-millionaire, but if I suddenly got hit with a 5% wealth tax I’d have too sell my house and be homeless to pay it. That’s not right or fair.
It’s basically a tax on unrealised gains, and I shouldn’t have to explain to you how that is terrible.
no one’s talking about a 5% wealth tax, and few people are even talking about applying it to people with fortunes as paltry as $10,000,000.
Us middle-class shlubs are already paying 1-2% wealth tax on our biggest asset, and that asset doesn’t even generate income. Why should billionaire stock portfolios be exempt?
Asset taxes, whether real estate or equity, encourage those assets to be put to productive use. If you can’t figure out how to extract 1% economic value out of your $100,000,000 company to pay the wealth tax, then maybe you should sell that company to someone who can run it right.
Unrealised gains should never be counted or taxed because of their very nature. So you even understand the difference between realised and unrealised gains?
Just because someone has more money than you it doesn’t mean they should be unfairly charged with extra taxes. That’s pathetic.
What 1-2% wealth tax are us shlubs already paying? Why are billionaires exempt from this?
You fundamentally don’t understand the difference between the value of a company and the cash on hand of that company.
What 1-2% wealth tax are us shlubs already paying?
You’re honestly lecturing me about unrealized gains and you don’t even know about Property Tax?!? Primary residence is the closest most people get to an investment portfolio, and they get taxed on its full value, not just the equity fraction they own.
No they don’t lol. Do you understand what unrealised gains are? It means you haven’t actually made the money. You haven’t got it. It’s an “on paper” gain, not realised until you cash out - at which time it counts as income and you pay income tax/capital gains/etc on it.
Think about it like this: you have $10 to your name. you buy a share for $10. It doubles to $20.
With what you’re suggesting, you would now be hit with a tax bill of say $4………but you have $0 dollars of actual money. How are you going to pay that tax bill?
What if your share lost value though, and dropped to $1? Should you get a tax refund now? Even though? What if it then goes back up to $15, souls you have to now pay tax on your “gain” of $14 from it going from $1 to $15? How often should you have to pay these taxes? Every day? Week?
It’s a truly idiotic idea, ranted by people who clearly have no idea how capital gains and assets work. Is likely driven by jealousy because the people who want it have no assets.
And I was referring to UK times richest list vs top taxpayers list.
We tax income, so workers, we don’t tax the wealthy who never earnt their money in the first place.
They literally pay the majority of all tax in a society
I’m going to have 1000 pizza pies, you’re going to have one. We each need to contribute to the group. You’ll give half of your pizza pie, I’ll give one whole pie. I’m a much bigger contributor than you. No one hungry should be upset with me, especially since I periodically give a slice to the people who bake all the pizzas for me. Enjoy your half pizza.
Let millionaires leave every country to form their own utopia. Let them try and live without anyone making the life go around. Just millionaires eventually eating each other.
So most assets are shares and structures. Shares you can sell, but someone still holds them, structures can be sold, but someone still owns them.
If a billionaire left, a fortune in capital gains would be made, the wealth would remain to be taxed from other hands, and that precludes the destination not having a higher wealth tax.
Wealth taxes are never one off. They might get a big payday once, but then thousands of people have lost their jobs, 50% of the income tax is now gone from the books for the next year, along with all the other business related taxes.
Most places would love billionaires to move in, because then they get enormous amounts of extra tax revenue and, typically, jobs.
Hang on - so you’re saying that when a billionaire sells something it ceases to exist? Surly not!
You might be suggesting that a billionaire creates jobs that vanish when they leave, however that’s not likely to be the case. Got any data to back that figure up?
They don’t sell, they move. All those jobs and taxes move somewhere else.
What did Musk do with Twitter/X when California became too hostile politically for his business? Moved it to Texas. All those jobs moved to Texas. Those jobs in San Francisco disappeared, as did the revenue and taxes that they brought in.
You never asked. You said that billionaires don’t take their companies out of state/country. You thought that they would just leave them there lol. I shows you that they don’t and now you switch arguments 🤣
Do they take their British workforce with them? No, so those stay behind. Can they produce the products they produce in the UK without that workforce by themselves? No, then they wouldn’t need the workforce. Can the workers produce the product? They know how, and have successfully been doing it for the duration of their employment. The only thing stopping them is capital and IP.
If you put a wealth tax on billionaires where you tax them on their total asset value, they’ll simply leave the country and take all of their millions/billions of dollars in taxes every year that they, their companies, and their employees pay, out of the country, leaving you in a much worse position than you’re already in since those are the people that already pay the majority of the countries income taxes etc.
Taxing wealth is a pathetic idea by people who can’t stand others being more successful than them.
You realise that they’ll not leave because it would be A LOT more expensive than just paying their taxes right ? Moving assets is expensive, they will not sell all their property, they will not move their companies. Them moving away is just propaganda for fools like you.
And in any case, they already don’t pay much, even if 1% of them move away, the tax income from the rest will make up for it.
According to Abigail Disney they already pay more to avoid taxes than the cost of the taxes themselves.
That’s absolutely not surprising. Paying for attorneys, transfer pricing experts, etc. would definitely cost a lot more
How is it not surprising when it contradicts your argument?
Because it allows them to increase their wealth while lowering their taxes, and the assets and properties are not moving or changing hands (well, they kind of are by moving from holding A to holding B, but the holdings are still entirely within their hands). That’s the expensive part which justifies paying experts.
Look I’m not married to this argument about fleeing capital, I don’t think it’s convincing that everyone will run off to Sweden or whatever. I just think that whatever the solution is will not be the most obvious one that can fit on a t-shirt sold on Gary’s merch page. Imo Gary is a grifter and I don’t appreciate how he denounces the “academics in their ivory tower” while saying he’s got all the answers and it’s so important that the prime minister calls him for help.
I don’t really know the guy, he just pops up on my feed sometimes, so I have no idea if he’s a self important jackass or not. But he raises a lot of important questions with answers we already know to be part of the solution. Raising taxes, destroying inheritance above a certain threshold, the looming threat of extreme Victorian-like inequalities, are all valid points.
Yea I heard the same arguments from people defending Andrew Tate; “he’s got a good message about putting in the work to better yourself”. My response was always that this is basic life stuff you can get from a thousand other people who aren’t sex traffickers. Likewise Gary isn’t the first person to talk about these issues, he isn’t even the thousandth, he’s just the guy who dressed it up with populist messaging and a victim narrative that the elites are trying to silence him.
He has all the hallmarks of being a grifter like the Weinstein brothers, Jordan Peterson, or Tate. Decoding the Gurus have done a few episodes on him being a weirdo that are fun and informative https://youtu.be/Ttrab7AMn-M
Short term cost for long term profit. Look at all the companies that up and left Delaware after what their courts pulled with musks pay packet.
A wealth tax wouldn’t just be a one off thing either, so it might cost them 2x what they’d have to pay to leave, but that has paid itself off after 2 years.
This objection has been brought up repeatedly but these are solvable problems.
Firstly, a lot of assets the wealthy own cannot be transferred out of country. Stock in companies, real estate, etc. The super rich are not rich because they have bank accounts with all of their money that can just disappear overnight, but because they own real things in the real world.
Secondly, economist Gabriel Zucman has proposed a solution to the “they will all take their money and leave.” The USA taxes all citizens on their income no matter where they are in the world. You could simply create a wealth tax that says “if you have wealth over 100 million USD and have lived in this country in the past 5 years, you have to pay the tax no matter where you live for the next X years. (X could be 5, 10, 15, whatever.) If it goes into effect starting in some future date of course people will try to shift assets and move but if you make it retroactive they can’t. Also the tax needs to apply to companies so they can’t have an LLC holding all of their assets tax free neither.
Finally, taxing wealth is not about being jealous or craven that others have more. It’s about survival of society in some form that isn’t “ten people own everything and the rest live in desperate poverty.”
For the ultra wealthy, their wealth can grow passively from compounding interest leaving them will little choice but to continue acquiring assets. If you were given a million dollars every week (that’s roughly 5% annual growth on a billion dollars) you would quickly find that you had lots of money sitting around despite paying off all of your debt, upgrading your house, having fun trips. Eventually you would start using that money to either buy stocks, real estate, etc. Then those things appreciate and your $1M per week begins to climb despite living a lavish lifestyle. It’s just a natural consequence at that point that you buy up and own real world assets at an increasing rate. This means there is less and less available to own for everyone in your community.
Essentially, at a certain point these individuals become financial black holes where their wealth is not only self sustaining but continues to grow and consume things. There is no stop unless society puts brakes on it to limit the growth beyond a certain point.
You’re totally right, thanks for not making me write this comment.
Hey guys, the world’s smartest people are saying tax the multi-millionaires and some of them have spent their life working on this topic. There’s nothing you can bring up that the economists pioneering the modern version of this solution haven’t considered. If you think taxing the wealthy won’t work, for any reason besides they have a whole lot of power and will fight it, than you’re a part of the problem and being propagandized into an apathetic state.
We can win, we will win, it’s not that hard of a problem to solve, we just have to fight for it.
One will die:
Society or the billionaire.
This just isn’t true. Billionaires do very little that negatively affects society. Mostly they just pay all the tax and provide all the jobs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_tax_avoidance
Of course…
That’s got nothing to do with billionaires though. Are you suggesting that businesses that don’t have a billionaire founder never have and can’t do things like that?
Everyone tries to pay as little tax as they can. Big companies are just better at it because they can afford lawyers and financial controllers who know all the laws and how to avoid paying certain taxes. That’s all your link says - Amazon know how to avoid paying taxes based on tax laws.
You know the solution? Fix the tax laws. Don’t hate the player, hate the game.
I do not try to pay as little Tax as i can, because i am not a selfish piece Shit.
So you never claim a single thing as a tax deduction?
Nope. Never did.
Doubt.
Dumb if true as well.
They don’t provide jobs, they tax jobs. The billionaire’s customers provide the jobs. The workers create the product, and the billionaire collects the money from the customer and pays a fraction of it to the worker. Without the billionaire, the worker could be earning the full value they provide to the customer.
Not false, but something has to give. Billionaires are a drain on society, the conditions that allowed their creation tanked the middle class. They centralize capital in their hand at the downfall of everyone else. A wealth tax is a step forward. Ideally, combined with international agreements with the biggest fiscal havens to not let them run away.
I want to stress how the rise of billionaires is a global phenomenon. In an ideal world, all nations would slowly implement wealth taxes.
Billionaires are generally the wealth creators, not drains. How many people do bezos and musk employ? How much tax do they, their companies, and their employees contribute?
I want you to engage in good faith with this thought experiment.
On one hand, you have Costco - many employees, no billionaires, all employees have good benefits, company pays its taxes. On the other you have Amazon - many employees, one billionaire, many employees are working poors, on snap or similar benefits. Amazon skirts its taxes as much as possible, while US subsidies its employees.
Which one helps society the most as a whole?
Google Jim Sinegal mate lol
Also Amazon seem to have great benefits:
https://www.amazon.jobs/content/en/our-workplace/benefits-us
The idea that billionaires would leave the economy that made them billions, the services and amenities that make being a billionaire worthwhille, and all their rich friends, all for a little tax break is pretty ridiculous. They already choose to live in California, New York, and London - expensive places with high taxes - rather than Cayman Islands or South Dakota.
They’re definitely not uprooting the whole corporate campus, moving it away from the skilled workforce it needs, the housing that they need, and the good schools that they want.
Billionaires’ personal wealth isn’t generating any taxable income, anyway, so there’s no income tax to lose if they do leave.
Avoiding a “wealth tax” isn’t just a “little tax break”.
Most wealth is on paper. Billionaires don’t just have a billion dollars of cash. I’m technically a multi-millionaire, but if I suddenly got hit with a 5% wealth tax I’d have too sell my house and be homeless to pay it. That’s not right or fair.
It’s basically a tax on unrealised gains, and I shouldn’t have to explain to you how that is terrible.
no one’s talking about a 5% wealth tax, and few people are even talking about applying it to people with fortunes as paltry as $10,000,000.
Us middle-class shlubs are already paying 1-2% wealth tax on our biggest asset, and that asset doesn’t even generate income. Why should billionaire stock portfolios be exempt?
Asset taxes, whether real estate or equity, encourage those assets to be put to productive use. If you can’t figure out how to extract 1% economic value out of your $100,000,000 company to pay the wealth tax, then maybe you should sell that company to someone who can run it right.
Missed the point of the example.
Unrealised gains should never be counted or taxed because of their very nature. So you even understand the difference between realised and unrealised gains?
Just because someone has more money than you it doesn’t mean they should be unfairly charged with extra taxes. That’s pathetic.
What 1-2% wealth tax are us shlubs already paying? Why are billionaires exempt from this?
You fundamentally don’t understand the difference between the value of a company and the cash on hand of that company.
You’re honestly lecturing me about unrealized gains and you don’t even know about Property Tax?!? Primary residence is the closest most people get to an investment portfolio, and they get taxed on its full value, not just the equity fraction they own.
We don’t have property tax where I live.
Billionaires make money on those unrealised gains. Therefore they are an asset, and must be taxed.
No they don’t lol. Do you understand what unrealised gains are? It means you haven’t actually made the money. You haven’t got it. It’s an “on paper” gain, not realised until you cash out - at which time it counts as income and you pay income tax/capital gains/etc on it.
Think about it like this: you have $10 to your name. you buy a share for $10. It doubles to $20.
With what you’re suggesting, you would now be hit with a tax bill of say $4………but you have $0 dollars of actual money. How are you going to pay that tax bill?
What if your share lost value though, and dropped to $1? Should you get a tax refund now? Even though? What if it then goes back up to $15, souls you have to now pay tax on your “gain” of $14 from it going from $1 to $15? How often should you have to pay these taxes? Every day? Week?
It’s a truly idiotic idea, ranted by people who clearly have no idea how capital gains and assets work. Is likely driven by jealousy because the people who want it have no assets.
You don’t understand how any of this works.
Says the guy who thinks imaginary money should be taxed.
Have you not heard of corporate/profits tax?
They arnt paying anyway so it’s not a loss.
That’s just not true. Elon musk paid the single highest tax bill anyone has ever paid, for example.
They are a drain on society. If they leave, it’s a net positive. If they start to pay their fair share, it’s a net positive. Either way we win.
They literally pay the majority of all tax in a society lol. They usually create tens of thousands of jobs, and pay those wages.
There aren’t many billionaires that don’t own and run massive companies that contribute greatly to society.
The top richest times list and the top taxpayers list don’t have any overlap. The majority of billionaires pay fuck all tax.
https://nchstats.com/who-pays-most-taxes-in-america/
You’re just wrong.
You have no idea, tax on income is nothing.
We should be taxing wealth, not work.
And I was referring to UK times richest list vs top taxpayers list. We tax income, so workers, we don’t tax the wealthy who never earnt their money in the first place.
No, you shouldn’t be taxing wealth for all the reasons I’ve listed many times.
We should absolutely be taxing wealth, if we don’t the economy will continue to become more and more in the hands of fewer and fewer.
Wealth should be taxed, if you can take loans out against the value of your stocks, then that should be taxed.
The only other workable solution is to make those types of loans illegal, then taxes on realised gains can actually be utilised.
If not, we should absolutely be taxing wealth, otherwise the wealthiest will continue to not pay their fair share.
“Not pay their fair share” when they each literally pay more than the bottom like 50% combined is an odd thing to say.
I’m going to have 1000 pizza pies, you’re going to have one. We each need to contribute to the group. You’ll give half of your pizza pie, I’ll give one whole pie. I’m a much bigger contributor than you. No one hungry should be upset with me, especially since I periodically give a slice to the people who bake all the pizzas for me. Enjoy your half pizza.
Only that’s not how it works. That’s not how the tax system works.
That’s literally how it’s working now. The top 0.1% pays propotionately less than top 10%
No they don’t.
Yes they do - https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1318404470397885&id=1518151076345001 https://youtube.com/shorts/mL796eqCQko (same lecture snippet) https://youtu.be/uz350LTmusw (full lecture)
Let millionaires leave every country to form their own utopia. Let them try and live without anyone making the life go around. Just millionaires eventually eating each other.
And what do you think happens to the countries that just lost 50% of their tax revenue because the 1% left?
Hang on…
So most assets are shares and structures. Shares you can sell, but someone still holds them, structures can be sold, but someone still owns them.
If a billionaire left, a fortune in capital gains would be made, the wealth would remain to be taxed from other hands, and that precludes the destination not having a higher wealth tax.
Wealth taxes are never one off. They might get a big payday once, but then thousands of people have lost their jobs, 50% of the income tax is now gone from the books for the next year, along with all the other business related taxes.
Most places would love billionaires to move in, because then they get enormous amounts of extra tax revenue and, typically, jobs.
Hang on - so you’re saying that when a billionaire sells something it ceases to exist? Surly not!
You might be suggesting that a billionaire creates jobs that vanish when they leave, however that’s not likely to be the case. Got any data to back that figure up?
They don’t sell, they move. All those jobs and taxes move somewhere else.
What did Musk do with Twitter/X when California became too hostile politically for his business? Moved it to Texas. All those jobs moved to Texas. Those jobs in San Francisco disappeared, as did the revenue and taxes that they brought in.
Still waiting on the source of your 50%.
You never asked. You said that billionaires don’t take their companies out of state/country. You thought that they would just leave them there lol. I shows you that they don’t and now you switch arguments 🤣
Let them live in their floating city states or in their underground bunkers like erzatz Bond villains. Let’s see how much wealth they create there.
Come find me boot licker, I’ll show ya jealousy. Its damn near dinner time, I can’t wait I’m starvin.
PS bring army cause you can’t do shit for yourself, ya gonna need it
At least you admit it’s jealousy.
Do they take their British workforce with them? No, so those stay behind. Can they produce the products they produce in the UK without that workforce by themselves? No, then they wouldn’t need the workforce. Can the workers produce the product? They know how, and have successfully been doing it for the duration of their employment. The only thing stopping them is capital and IP.