Log in

View Full Version : Norway releases income and wealth data



dez
23rd October 2009, 00:17
Who makes what? In Norway, it's all online

Release of income and wealth data stirs media frenzy, playground taunts


OSLO - It's the moment nosy neighbors have been waiting for — the release of official records showing the annual income and overall wealth of nearly every Norwegian taxpayer.In a move that would be unthinkable in most countries, tax authorities in left-leaning Norway have issued the "skatteliste," or "tax list," for 2008 to domestic media under a law designed to safeguard the country's tradition of transparency.
The annual list includes data about fishermen on the western fjords, Sami reindeer herders in the north, city folk in Oslo and even members of the committee that awarded President Barack Obama the Nobel Peace Prize.


To non-Scandinavians, it appears to be a gross violation of privacy. At home, it has stirred up a media frenzy, with splashy headlines revealing who is oil-rich Norway's wealthiest man, woman and celebrity couple.
The data shows that former cross-country skiing great Bjoern Daehlie still has plenty of cash — 29.3 million kroner — $5.4 million — to be exact. The finances of other famous Norwegians, including actress and director Liv Ullmann, former marathon champion Grete Waitz or writer Jostein Gaarder, are also unveiled.
'Tax porno'
Defenders of the system say it enhances transparency, which is essential for an open democracy.
"Isn't this how a social democracy ought to work, with openness, transparency and social equality as ideals?" wrote Jan Omdahl, a columnist for the tabloid Dagbladet. He acknowledged, however, that many treat the list like "tax porno" — furtively checking neighbors' or co-workers' incomes.

Click for related content

Vote: Should other countries do the same? (http://www.newsvine.com/_question/2009/10/22/3412212-would-you-like-to-see-the-us-and-other-countries-join-norway-in-releasing-everyones-annual-incomes)


Critics say the list poses a threat to the very society whose freedom it's meant to protect.
"What each Norwegian earns and what you have in wealth is a private matter between the taxpayer and the government," said Jon Stordrange, director of the Norwegian Taxpayer's Association.
Besides providing criminals with a useful tool to find prime targets, he claimed the list generates my-dad-is-richer-than-yours taunts in the playground.
"The children of people with low wages are being teased about it in the schools," Stordrange said Thursday. "People with low salaries are being met with comments at the grocery store, 'How can you live on these low wages?'"
Tapping into databases
Many media outlets use the tax records to produce their own searchable online databases. In national broadcaster NRK's database, you can type a name, hit search and within moments get information on exactly what that person made last year, paid in taxes and his or her total wealth.
It also gives an overview of how those figures compare with Norway's national averages for men and women, and averages for that person's city of residence.
The information had been available to media until 2004, when a right-wing government banned the publication of tax records. Three years later, a new, left-leaning government reversed its predecessor's legislation and also made it possible for media to obtain tax information digitally and disseminate it online.
Norway's 2007 law emphasized that "first and foremost, it's the press that can contribute to a critical debate" on wealth and the elaborate tax scheme that, along with the country's vast oil wealth, keeps Norway's extensive — and expensive — welfare system afloat.
Who is richest man?
The country of 4.8 million people had the third highest income tax among industrialized countries in 2007, according to the latest OECD statistics, behind Denmark and New Zealand.
Since the latest tax data was released Wednesday, national media have scrambled to analyze it, building top-10 lists and graphic breakdowns of income differentials between sexes, age groups, cities and towns.


So who's Norway's richest man? Tobacco mogul Johan Henrik Andresen, worth $2 billion, has surpassed last year's No. 1, industrialist Kjell Inge Roekke, according to Dagbladet.
Norway's richest woman was stock market investor Tone Bjoerseth-Andersen, whose wealth of $107 million placed her behind 24 men, the paper said.
Members of the royal family are not on the list because they don't pay taxes. Others excluded from the list include people whose details are kept secret for security reasons and the homeless.


'Super-duels'
NRK's online edition compared the income of Norwegian celebrity couples — called "super-duels" — while newspaper Aftenposten's Web site ranked common Norwegian first names by wealth under the headline "How rich is your name?"
It found men named Terje tend to do very well, while among women, Marit is a sure winner.
Most other European countries, including Britain, Italy and the Netherlands, have very different attitudes toward transparency and privacy and would be horrified at such a scheme. Last week the Spanish government for the first time released information on how much each member of the Cabinet is worth — assets and debts — but data on private citizens is still private.


In Norway's neighbor Sweden, however, anyone can order a printed edition of the Taxation Calendar, which lists the earnings of people in mid-to-high-end income brackets. The information is also available online, but anonymous checks were barred in 2007 after a public outcry. Swedes whose finances have been viewed online are now notified by mail about who checked their details.
Christine Ingebritsen, a professor at the University of Washington who studies Scandinavian economics, said the Norwegian tax list exemplifies a time-tested, distinctly Scandinavian custom of egalitarianism.
"This is how you make sure that you're being legitimate in the eyes of the community — you show that the wealth of a CEO isn't off the charts," she said. Unlike the U.S., Norway "places the wealth and health of all as a priority above the individual success stories."






http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33432085/ns/world_news-europe/page/2/











Thoughts?

Tatarin
23rd October 2009, 00:38
"Left-leaning" Norway? So that's why Fremskridspartiet is so successful there? The Social Democrats won with only a small marginal.

rednordman
23rd October 2009, 00:48
Unlike the U.S., Norway "places the wealth and health of all as a priority above the individual success stories."






http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33432085/ns/world_news-europe/page/2/











Thoughts?This is obviously irresponsible media gone mad and very unfair on hardworking poorer families. Its not like the 50s and 60s anymore, in norway they have to deal with the full brunt of capitalism just like anywhere else, so being blase about this is unfair as the levels of equality are not what they once where (if they ever where - the east was always considered more wealthier than the west and north). There is however a little bit of truth in the quote mentioned in bold text though, just it applied more to times before the 90s though imo.

rednordman
23rd October 2009, 00:59
"Left-leaning" Norway? So that's why Fremskridspartiet is so successful there? The Social Democrats won with only a small marginal.The only reason why they are popular is because they make massive promises that they blatantly are not fit to do. They are also rather sensationalist and very quick to place blame of the countries problems on scapgoats, rather than looking at them for what the are.

Uncle Ho
23rd October 2009, 15:24
"Left-leaning" Norway? So that's why Fremskridspartiet is so successful there? The Social Democrats won with only a small marginal.

Well, compared to America, Ghenghis Khan was "left leaning"

It's not really very hard to be left of a nation which has 2 parties, a radical right wing/christian extremist party and a right of center "moderate" party which is so hamstrung by it's own membership it couldn't pass a resolution to tie it's shoes.

cyu
23rd October 2009, 17:54
Christine Ingebritsen, a professor at the University of Washington who studies Scandinavian economics, said the Norwegian tax list exemplifies a time-tested, distinctly Scandinavian custom of egalitarianism.



This is what counts as "egalitarianism" these days? If they were truly egalitarian, there wouldn't even be any desire to compare dick lengths since people would be free to take what they wanted.

It would be as silly as a (uncorrupted) democracy comparing how many times did you vote for politician X last year.

dez
23rd October 2009, 18:01
This is what counts as "egalitarianism" these days? If they were truly egalitarian, there wouldn't even be any desire to compare dick lengths since people would be free to take what they wanted.

It would be as silly as a (uncorrupted) democracy comparing how many times did you vote for politician X last year.

People would never be free to take what they wanted.
Ever.
They should be able to take exactly what they worked for, and be free to work, which is quite different.



I do think its way more egalitarian than, say, the us, and that this is an interesting concept specially on the part of fighting allienation.

NecroCommie
23rd October 2009, 20:01
To say that Norway is not left-leaning is madness, since "left-leaning" can be a terribly relative term. On the other hand, it's not like social democracy is THAT much better. It just uses imperialism to mellow down the symptoms of capitalism, leaving the disease intact. I am certain that the nordic social democracy will soon fall, if not to the economy, then to the increasing elitism of our citizens. Now that most people have money, they think they somehow deserved it all with "hard work", and they are therefor racing for who gets to be the biggest right-wing nut. Boy are most scandinavian right-wingers in for a surprise when they take down the social democrat setting, and simultaneously lose all their "money" and "equality".

Hell, social democracy has a long way to go if it wants to retain it's reputation as a worker's movement, but I do know that there are alot worse fates for nordic countries. Already for ten years there have been slightly accelerating signs of social democratic collapse, but when does it actually fall will remain to be seen.

Yazman
24th October 2009, 10:21
I heard about this, I thought it was quite an interesting move on their part. I would like to see this done in other countries so we can gain more evidence against them.

Yazman

Wanted Man
24th October 2009, 10:28
That's interesting. I don't think it could happen here. Commentators from all sides of the political spectrum would decry it as "typical Dutch tall poppy syndrome", because everyone who wants to know about this should be ashamed of themselves. :rolleyes: There is a business magazine that makes estimates of the 500 richest citizens every year, but this is presented as something admirable, most of the time.

Yazman
24th October 2009, 10:30
I hate when they cite "tall poppy syndrome", goddamn. It pisses me off to no end.

Yazman

eyedrop
24th October 2009, 11:18
I think the tax lists are quite useful myself. It gives you a few extra bullets to fire of when your boss complains about wage costs and you can check directly how much he himself takes out.

Additionally you can easily look it up and check how practically no rich folks pay much tax. (I've heard some finance folks say that the tax lists are guidelines though, I recon they cheat much more than is available on the tax lists) I also use it to check out how much the leader of organisations earn. If a leader of an south-aid group takes out an above a million wage I know they are crooks.

cyu
24th October 2009, 18:48
I do think its way more egalitarian than, say, the us, and that this is an interesting concept specially on the part of fighting allienation.


Well, that's pretty much a given =]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index#2009_report

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index#2008_ranking


People would never be free to take what they wanted.
Ever.
They should be able to take exactly what they worked for, and be free to work, which is quite different.


I see that mainly as a difference in our politics based on differences in what we believe motivates people. Excerpts from equal pay for unequal work (http://everything2.com/user/gate/writeups/equal+pay+for+unequal+work):

There was an experiment documented in Elliot Aronson's The Social Animal - some people were divided into two groups. In one group, the people were paid to do a certain activity. In the other group, the people were not paid to do the activity, but instead the organizers emphasized things like how much fun the activity was. At the end of the experiment, the people who were paid were much less likely to have found the activity enjoyable and would only do it again if they were paid again. The others were more likely to do the activity again of their own accord.

http://www.alfiekohn.org/books/pbr.htm also documents how giving someone a "reward" for work ultimately results in the person liking the job less and only going after the reward.

There is also this from http://bookoutlines.pbwiki.com/Predictably-Irrational


Ariely then ran another experiment. He read from "Leaves of Grass," and then asked his students the following:

1/2 of the students were asked if they would be willing to pay Ariely $10 for a 10-minute poetry recitation
1/2 of the students were asked if they would be willing to listen to a 10-minute poetry recitation if Ariely paid them $10
The students who were asked if they were willing to pay offered $1 for a short reading, $2 for a medium reading, and $3 for a long reading.
The students who were asked if they'd accept pay demanded $1.30 for a short reading, $2.70 for a medium reading, and $4.80 for a long reading.
In today's system, you convince people to work by offering them money. You convince them to want money by advertising goods they can buy. Without product advertising, would people still want those goods (or money) as much? What then is the purpose of it all? To create a "desire" that wouldn't have existed otherwise, so you can fill that desire – it seems to me to just be a system of creating unnecessary work. Now before you make the argument that advertising isn't all that effective in getting people to buy what they don't want, consider this: why spend so much effort on advertising? It supports all of network television – million dollar salaries for the cast of Friends. Companies wouldn't spend so much if it didn't work. If advertising is just informative, then why spend all that money on slick ads? Why not just a simple, boring blurb about your product? The answer, of course, is that "boring" doesn't sell.

So let's turn this around. Instead of trying to convince people to want things they don't want, instead convince them to want to do things that actually need doing. Seems like a much more direct method to me and a much better use of the skills of our great advertisers.

As long as the advertising is controlled democratically, then the electorate already knows how important these jobs are. Thus, they already have the motivation to get these things done. The only real question is, are they able to make these activities sound enjoyable. To that end, they just need to employ the same psychological tools that product advertisers have been honing for years.

I would imagine different people would give their support to many different organizations. Each of these organizations would be supporting advertising for different activities. The more people supporting one organization, the more advertising you'd see for the jobs supported by that organization.

If you're "lazy" and don't feel like doing anything, nobody forces you to work. You are free to stay at home and watch TV or surf the internet all day. However, instead of being constantly bombarded with ads trying to get you to want more stuff, you are instead bombarded with ads trying to get you to want to go out and do stuff that society thinks needs doing.

As long as people see value in doing something, they are free to support advertising for that kind of activity. Sports, for example, are good for people's health, and, in cases like swimming, can save lives. However, if some other activity could not only provide exercise, but also help out other people at the same time (for example, building a wheelchair accessible trail along a scenic mountain path), then I could easily see more people gravitating toward promoting that other activity.

rednordman
24th October 2009, 23:15
To say that Norway is not left-leaning is madness, since "left-leaning" can be a terribly relative term. On the other hand, it's not like social democracy is THAT much better. It just uses imperialism to mellow down the symptoms of capitalism, leaving the disease intact. I am certain that the nordic social democracy will soon fall, if not to the economy, then to the increasing elitism of our citizens. Now that most people have money, they think they somehow deserved it all with "hard work", and they are therefor racing for who gets to be the biggest right-wing nut. Boy are most scandinavian right-wingers in for a surprise when they take down the social democrat setting, and simultaneously lose all their "money" and "equality".

Hell, social democracy has a long way to go if it wants to retain it's reputation as a worker's movement, but I do know that there are alot worse fates for nordic countries. Already for ten years there have been slightly accelerating signs of social democratic collapse, but when does it actually fall will remain to be seen.Scary but true. And I think you may have a point about the whole 'collapse of social democracy' thing. However, I do think that the last election results did infact prove the point that alot of norwegiens are actually in favour of SD, because for a minute, I was convinced that it was going to be Siv Jensens Fkps year. All I know is that the labour party for literally up to about 6months before the general election, where getting a hammering within the media.

Anyhow, I do find it intreguing that there are now Right-Wing nuts within Norway, as its is rather obviously that the country would be alot poorer after the collapse of Social Democracy. This has been proven before also.

rednordman
24th October 2009, 23:23
Additionally you can easily look it up and check how practically no rich folks pay much tax. (I've heard some finance folks say that the tax listsI will say that with having a working class familly over there that tells often about the levels of Tax in Norway compared to that of the UK, this is astonishing. Even In the UK and US(as far as I know) Rich people do infact get taxed relatively progessively (in other words, the more you earn, the more you are taxed).

eyedrop
25th October 2009, 14:25
Odd Christopher Hansen (http://www.nrk.no/nyheter/okonomi/skattelister/836236) DoB 1953 Income 40.834.158 Wealth 103.458.608 Tax 1.748.071

If you check them out somewhat selectively you can see find such doucebags as this guy. Plenty of wealth and income and barely any tax paid.

Most aren't as bad as him though, although if you remove th wealth taxes I doubt any of them are paying close to the 56% top-bracket income tax they are supposed to. This year it looks better than I remember it from last year. Real wealth acumulation isn't done through income though.

A New Era
25th October 2009, 20:37
Skattelistene (the tax lists) as they are called, is a good thing, because they put a light on the differences in tax pay. Some of the richest men in Norway only pay 0,001 percent in taxes, and this comes up in the tax list. And this is in contrast to working men and women who may pay something like 40 percent in taxes. It's fucking disgusting.

And yet the workers of Norway defend them and say the rich are oppressed and pay too much in taxes. Where is the logic in that? Dumb sheeps.

I am not particularly smart myself, but the majority of people in Norway are so fucking dumb I have given up on humanity.

Tatarin
26th October 2009, 01:25
Skattelistene (the tax lists) as they are called, is a good thing, because they put a light on the differences in tax pay.

But the main question is what this tax list is good for? So what if the owner of Norwegian Oil Inc. get a billion every year and people know this? Every person knows this. Leftists have been saying this since before Norway even existed. What is needed is motivation to get the people to react against these unequalities.

People know that big companies release toxins in the environment. People know that the rich "get away" more often than the poor. For that matter, countless documentaries have been shown about this kind of problems. What is missing is that the origin - the hen - of the problems is never questioned. This is what must be changed.


And yet the workers of Norway defend them and say the rich are oppressed and pay too much in taxes. Where is the logic in that? Dumb sheeps.

I can understand your frustration, but understand that the ruling classes of the world have used unrelenting propaganda to get people to that point. You could just as well ask the question why capitalism came so late it did, and not 100 years earlier.

Or take a look at the beloved social democratic parties. How come they never counter the argument ("the rich are taxed too much")? They may be quick to say that the welfare state requires this, but never the consequences of the rich getting away without being taxed.

What people have been led to believe is that the country somehow magically gives them welfare, that Norway is on a much higher standard than many Third World countries. They are steered away from the thought that they themselves fought for every right they have now.

rednordman
26th October 2009, 20:28
I am not particularly smart myself, but the majority of people in Norway are so fucking dumb I have given up on humanity.:rolleyes:FFS! Have you ever for one minute considered that people in Norway understand that their average standard of living is in general much better than the rest of europe. Compared to most of europe (uk included) they have it great, and they know this. Unfortuanetly, for them, why complain, when life is worser in countries with more ecomonic power then them (such as the UK)? Incidently, from own experience the majority of norwegiens I have met and know have a very critical opinion of the wealthy (as in, they are miles too greedy, and spend more time in la manga than they do in norway).

dez
4th November 2009, 19:49
Where do rich people live, and where do poor people live, skattenlist strikes again!


Solid statistical data:
http://media.aftenposten.no/archive/01138/_F-Br_dtekst-0311L_1138824a.jpg


Yearly:
Pink - 0-250000 kr
Purple - (or whatever color that is) 250000-300000 kr
Light Blue - 300000 - 400000 kr
Blue - 400000 - 500000 kr
Blue dot - above 600000kr (which is tantamount to 100.000 USD)
Red dot - Below 150000 ( 25000 USD )

http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/oslo/article3356337.ece

GatesofLenin
5th November 2009, 05:49
I heard about this, I thought it was quite an interesting move on their part. I would like to see this done in other countries so we can gain more evidence against them.

Yazman
Not going to happen in North America I'm afraid because the ruling class will all be on top of the top earners list including politicians. Great to make $150000+ and get tax breaks while the working man makes barely $30000 to support himself or herself and their families and still pay the majority of the taxes collected.