@impression_ists It’s «The Day After» or «dagen derpå» in Norwegian: nasjonalmuseet.no/en/collection/…
Dansk
Markus W
88 posts
GIF
Quartr@Quartr_App
For over a century and a half, The New York Times have defined what quality journalism looks like. Built on a print model that endured wars, crises, and generations of ownership, it became one of the world's most influential newspapers. Then came the internet and the question of whether a newspaper could survive without print. Edge #77: The New York Times Company $NYT
ZXX
@upsn_ @yasirahmadnoori @framer @paper I’ve been using it for everything from experimental posters to full web design. The big sell is definitely the code-native workflow. I'll be sharing some of my Paper work soon! Also, I believe the @Quartr_App team uses it to get that signature look for their posters.
English
English
Should I spend my time mastering Framer (@framer), or go all in on building with AI tools?
AI is moving fast and I don't want to learn the wrong thing.
What would YOU do?
English
Many such founders will make this mistake.
They’ll favor speed and budget over quality and conversion, and end up with a white paper versus an actual landing page.
Then they’ll wonder why their conversions dropped, and eventually come running back to designers.
Dhravya Shah@DhravyaShah
English
Markus W retweetet
i die a little inside when founders use the fact that they fired people as a flex for a headline
Dhravya Shah@DhravyaShah
English
here’s some of our latest work for Web3, AI, and Saas startups.
branding, websites, product design, development, and launch videos.
we do it all.
@oakline_studio
GIF
English
This isn’t a burger. This is the stuff you clean off of the grill before you make a burger
English
@lukasminnebeck @bevel_health WHOOP just introduced a massive audience to an even better alternative🙃
English
WHOOP’s lawyers are cooked
Pretty sure they just ran @bevel_health’s best ever growth campaign
Those growth numbers are going to be juicy 🍿
English
10,112,165 views in 30 days.
Built by one person. In 6 months.
Just me, doing what I love and having fun whilst building it.
Entrepreneurship media is changing fast.
Attention spans have changed.
People dont want performative click bait. They want real conversations, live and unscripted.
Here’s to owning the next generation of attention…
English
The Exit Tax was the 'closing window' that accelerated the timing, sure. But why were they looking for the exit in the first place? If the wealth tax wasn't a problem, nobody would care if the exit tax door was locked. People don't flee a country they want to stay in just because it becomes harder to leave later. They leave because the annual cost of staying (Wealth Tax + Dividend Tax) became a net negative for their companies…
English
@wiig_markus @FredrikHjelm4 I disagree in that the cause is purely due to the wealth tax increasing from 0.85 to 1.15%.
The main driver is to save money e.g. not pay tax. Being able to move to another country to escape a huge future tax bill was a very attractive opportunity people knew was gonna close
English
The one with the deepest pockets have the longest legs
Again: capital is mobile, labour is not
Markus W@wiig_markus
@FredrikHjelm4 Numbers don't lie. When the 'exit' costs less than the 'stay,' people leave. Norway’s experiment is a textbook case of how well-intentioned policies can backfire when they ignore global mobility…
English
@tordrt @FredrikHjelm4 You've got the cause and effect backward. The 'Swiss wave' started immediately after the 2022 wealth tax hike. The government only scrambled to tighten the exit tax after they realized their policy was causing a mass exodus.
English
@FredrikHjelm4 A lot of these people partially left to avoid the exit tax, not the wealth tax.
Norway richest man at the time, Kjell Inge Røkke managed to leave with all his holdings without paying a single dime in tax of his unrealized capital gains earned while living in Norway.
English
@FredrikHjelm4 Numbers don't lie. When the 'exit' costs less than the 'stay,' people leave. Norway’s experiment is a textbook case of how well-intentioned policies can backfire when they ignore global mobility…
English
Got asked about a "Billionaire Tax"
My answer: "an incredibly stupid idea"
Capital is mobile. Labour is not. The workers always pay
When the billionaires leave, the tax base shrinks and the workers are stuck holding the bill
Fredrik Hjelm@FredrikHjelm4
Sweden: we are a high-tax socialist country, everyone contributes, we take care of each other The income tax story is real. Starts at 30%, hits 55% at the top, add employer social fees at 31.4% and you're north of 65% fully loaded on senior salaries Also Sweden: >inheritance tax abolished 2004 >gift tax abolished 2004 >wealth tax abolished 2007 >property tax capped at $900/year regardless of what your home is worth >no tax on unrealized gains >borrow against your holdco personally and live on the loan tax free >capital gains at 20-30%, only when you actually take money out >ISK accounts (think Roth IRA but works for unlisted assets too, no capital gains tax on the inside) I spent years believing the story. Running a company and making some money changed it The big families didn't build dynasties despite the tax system. They built it, across Social Democrat and centre-right governments alike, because the rules never changed when the party did I ran the California comparison. Top income is similar pain, roughly 50% combined. But California taxes capital gains as ordinary income, around 37% combined. Federal estate tax hits 40% above $14M. Sweden is more capital-friendly than California in almost every category that matters for building generational wealth The story Sweden tells about itself is not the real story. It punishes labor and protects capital, same as everywhere else. Just with better parental leave so nobody complains Look, the low capital taxes are actually good policy. Abolishing inheritance tax brought capital back and the data supports it. But the gap between how labor and capital get taxed is hard to justify on fairness grounds. A flatter, more harmonized rate between the two would be simpler and more honest It would also save the country billions of hours in admin overhead, for individuals navigating the rules and for the civil services enforcing them Why not just do a flat level across? Seems easier
English
