It appears that the elites who have lobbied for cheap labor and lectured us on the benefits of vibrant diversity aren’t so keen on sticking around to enjoy the multicultural paradises they helped create.
At least, these are the obvious conclusions to be drawn from a recently released report by New World Wealth on millionaire migration in 2015.
The country with the single largest outflow of millionaires is France, losing 3% of them last year alone. According to the report, these figures were “heavily impacted by rising religious tensions between Christians and Muslims, especially in urban areas.” I suppose that is one way of putting it. These trends are predicted to accelerate in the next decade “as these tensions escalate,” and similar “religious tensions” are also expected to “negatively affect” countries such as Belgium, Germany, Sweden, and the UK “in the near future.” Where is Monsieur MoneyBags taking off to? “Tel Aviv had large inflows from Europe, especially France. Other Israeli cities such as Herzliya, Jerusalem and Netanya also experienced inflows.” Well, no wonder many French nationalists and anti-Zionists are so suspiciously Islamophilic.
London experienced a net inflow of 500 millionaires in 2015, a decrease over previous years because of the rising number of British-born millionaires leaving for other parts of England – “mainly to small towns in the London commuter belt along the Thames” – and to other parts of the Anglosphere such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the US. One would note that these countries tend to have lower tax rates, nicer climates, and if not a lack of diversity, then at least cognitively elitist immigration policies designed to only let the cleverer (or at least wealthier) sorts inside. In contrast, as noted in the New World Wealth report, millionaire arrivistes to London were almost entirely foreigners. It further predicts that “this may be a trend that continues in future as several wealthy UK born people that we spoke to said they were concerned about the way London and the UK in general had changed over the past decade or so.” We ever so wonder what they mean by that. “Australia seems to be their preferred destination.” Presumably, they would rather their children live in Singapore Down Under instead of AfroEurabia.
What’s particularly striking about all this is that France and Italy have more millionaire expats, even in percentage terms, than does Russia – a country whose apatride elites are infamous for buying up properties in London and Florida and sending their children off to British boarding schools. This is frequently cited in the Western media (and the Russian media too) as evidence of well-heeled Russians “voting with their feet” against the legal nihilism and and ideological bankruptcy under Putin, but if so what does it then say about those far richer Western countries where the numbers of fleeing millionaires are surging well past those of Putin’s “mafia state”?
This applies all the more so for China. Although there have likewise been numerous media reports of how rich Chinese are “fleeing” their country en masse – as with Russia, inevitably either to safeguard their hard-earned wealth from the rapacity of government bureaucrats or to stash away the misbegotten proceeds of corruption – the actual numbers for them (relative to the size of their millionaire pool) are actually very modest. It appears that relatively more Chinese millionaires are prepared to wait a few more years for China to resolve its air pollution problems than French millionaires are to wait a few more years for the French Socialists to make another go at introducing an 80% top bracket income tax rate to pay for the rising welfare and prison costs of all those incoming doctors and engineers.
If you are to treat the numbers of Chinese and Russian millionaires leaving as “pedal votes” against the corruption and political malfeasance of their countries, then logic and consistency likewise dictates that you apply the same judgmental approach to the even larger European millionaires fleeing the diversity their governments have been imposing on them. Ironically, of course, just as the elites in Russia or China are at least as much the enablers of the corruption and governance problems that afflict them as they are its victims, so the elite class in Europe has been instrumental in supporting policies that are now pushing them out of their own countries (not that we should be too sorry about their plight: Unlike them, the middle and working classes do not have the means to leave at all. But their money and human capital will be missed).
But for some reason, I don’t see the Western media using this as to bludgeon France or Sweden like they do with Russia or China. After all, the latter two are America’s geopolitical rivals, while the former are loyal servants of the globalist nation wreckers who rule the West.
Interesting analysis. The report also forecasts increasing millionaire emigration from Turkey. Will they flee to the UAE or the other Gulf States? Or will they end up somewhere in the “Islamophobic” West?
[We gathered this information via:
Investor visa program statistics in each country.
Interviews with around 800 global HNWIs a year.
Interviews with intermediaries (migration experts, second citizenship platforms, wealth managers
and property agents).
Property registers and property sales statistics in each country.
Tracking of HNWI movements in the media.]
Doesn’t seem like an ironclad methodology to me.
Puts a hole in the “rich people want immigrants for cheap labor” and “liberalism is a way of signaling that you’re rich enough to be isolated from the consequences of librealism” theories. And boosts the “there’s no conspiracy, governments and elites don’t know what the hell they’re doing either” theory.
Not sure about the rest of Europe, but a good proportion of native “millionaires” in London are likely to be normal people with normal jobs whose housing wealth has gone over the million pound mark. A small Victorian terrace originally built for workers would be sufficient. In these circumstances there’s a certain logic to either selling up and buying a Palacial estate somewhere cheaper or turning the thing into a kommunalka/hmo and have 4-5 “high IQ” professionals pay you 50% of their salaries in exorbitant rents, while you live somewhere else.
The report doesn’t show any statistical work to demonstrate causality or indeed any real correlation between net migration and diversity, nor do the authors show any of the background on their methodology – questions asked, sample breakdown, how sample was recruited. Exceptions (i.e. the UK) are not exactly given strong reasons for why they would be exceptional – the commuter belt is a lot less monocultural than say, East Anglia, for example, and we can see by the rest of the sample to moving to other countries that access to significant economic centres is not a major driving factor.
I would be cautious about reading too much into this, they may have done their research properly and not shown it, but if we can’t see their working we must assuming that their bias is showing.
First note that in percentages the outflow from Russia is higher than that from any european country with the exception of France last year where the taxes are very high. In terms of multimilionaires the outflow from Russia is the highest in Europe. Second, the murder or rape rate in the US is much higher than in any EU country so your main pillar is not supported by facts. Third, Australia or Canada are not better managed or more viable economically than France or Germany despite the fact that they have much higher resources and space. Also do not produce really top science in terms of discoveries nor have major companies so your neoliberal views are not present in facts. London and Paris are to expensive for ordinary milionaires. The money that buys a modest house in central London or Paris buys a palace in Canada
Not necessarily. It could simply be the case that, having now made their money off of cheap labor back hom, these nouveax riches choose to move on to greener pastures. New Zealand is now the world’s gated community, dontcha know!
Look again, noriega. On the outflow table, Russia is only 2 percent. That’s the same as 3 other countries and less than both France and Greece. In fact, Russia outranks only Brazil and China (both 1%) in percentage terms.
Have you had a vision test lately?
you just find a way to claim an answer, there is no contradiction between my point and facts nor you show any such contradiction. you are nonsense
No it doesn’t.
It simply reinforces the point they were too greedy to care about the consequences until it affected them personally and now they have created a disaster with their greed they use the loot they accrued from it to find someplace safer for them.
Your own words, right back at you:
And my reply, once again:
To make it plain for you: Russia’s outflow was less than both France and Greece, which means that it did not have the “highest” outflow in Europe, as you incorrectly stated. As per the table above, it had the third highest outflow percentage–along with three other countries.
Got it now?
John Cleese on current London:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2032956/John-Cleese-London-longer-English-city-thats-got-2012-Olympics.html
Agreed. They let their shameless greed kill the goose that was laying the golden egg. They didn’t think long term or about consequences, just padding their pockets. As Lenin said in reference to the capitalist west, “they will sell us the rope we will use to hang them”.
“London is no longer an English city. That’s how we got the Olympics.”
Pretty cold comfort if you ask me. Sacrificing the centuries old heritage of your country’s largest city and capital just to get an event that last for a few weeks. What about all the rest of the time?
“I love having different cultures around. But when the parent culture dissipates, your left thinking ” well what’s’ going on?”
He is saying he loves different cultures but then moans the loss of the displaced native culture, which can only happen when you have different cultures around that he says he loves.
Not really, since most millionaires are just ordinary businessmen, not necessarily elites.
After giving this interview, Cleese went back to supporting left-wing parties that happen to support mass immigration.
A lot of anti-immigration people are like him. They won’t support anti-immigration parties even if they keep grumbling about immigration’s negative effects.
Remember when that Italian cruise ship captain abandoned his sinking ship, leaving his passengers behind? He was widely reviled.
People should be free to leave a sinking ship – or a sinking country – if they can. UNLESS THEY WERE THE ONES RESPONSIBLE FOR IT SINKING IN THE FIRST PLACE.
I suggest that all people with assets over $10 million, that lobbied for open borders immigration, should be forced to continue to live in their own country, along with their children and grandchildren. Oh, and their children would all have to go to public schools. I know, there is no way that such a proposal could become law. But just talking about it might help focus the mind on what’s really going on here.
Europe’s class of millionaires supporting extermination through race replacement brings to mind another recent, former great European leader who too, while leading his country to ruin, justified his actions by claiming that his countrymen were not fit to survive if they could not hold their own in life’s tempestuous arena.
But unlike Europe’s current crop of spineless, treasonous, scurrying-rats, at least Hitler had the integrity to go down with the ship.
Greece is a special case of a small population not relevant to the ensamble and in the case of france is just one year as I said, Russia beats both of them actually for any longer interval, but even for one year, the average for Russia is higher than average EU or Europe, so you effectively lack comprehension of the issue, to hard for you
Yinon Plan moving along right on schedule.
Ten million defines the new ‘millionaire’. In fact today, a ‘millionaire’ must have 2 million just to equal the income of someone at the poverty level, with today’s ‘safe’ yields at about one percent or less.