A Cruise Ship Called “The World” Is a Luxury Home at Sea for the Super Rich
skift.com
skift.com
[0]: http://aboardtheworld.com/sites/default/files/Residence-1001...
There are $2m condos near where I live, so consider something like a $45m lifetime cost (if you buy in at 60, stay until you're 90, and somehow never recover that sale price), and that's only a single order of magnitude difference. That's way less than I had expected for something in such short supply.
[0] https://www.seabourn.com/ [1] https://www.silversea.com/en.html [2] http://aboardtheworld.com/sites/default/files/TheWorld-FAQ.p...
Well, for a resident, you eliminate the cognitive load of changing residences. Your home on the ship is literally a home (albeit a heavily-regulated one, in the style of extreme HOAs), and you can treat it like one, rather than having to slice everything into several-week increments because you might have to leave or change cabins at short notice.
Of course, this comes with tremendous maintenance prices ($1m+ per residence per year), but for some people it's worth that.
probably cheaper than maintaining an equivalently sized yacht, and without needing to hire someone competent to maintain your staff, etc.
Hopefully in a couple of decades such energetic excesses will be condemned by humanity.
1 http://www.ship-technology.com/projects/world/
2 https://www.wholesalesolar.com/1977425/astronergy/solar-pane...
And there should be luxury taxes too. The super-rich get this shit on discount (20% capital gains in the U.S.?), while most of us have to pay upwards of 40% extra for doing salaried work. It's not right.
Also: emissions taxes are sometimes regressive, for example consider that home prices usually go up with shorter commutes.
Since the most universal benefit of having money is getting the first pick of all the options, you'll quickly find that "those rich people" are incredibly hard to pin down with tax plans. Whatever you make the worst asset class will quickly end up in the hands of whoever can't afford better.
I agree with most of what you said (I'm sure there will be unintended consequences). However that specific consequence...
The middle class has largely no retirement savings at all (median savings for even 50+ yr old household is about one year's income). To the extent that the middle class has retirement savings, it falls way, way, way under the pretax tax advantaged account limits for 401k, IRA, etc. Capital gains tax on retirement savings is a problem only for the upper upper middle class who can afford to stock away more than like 20k/yr into retirement.
I guess the main thing is the networking aspect and having neighbors, but that doesn't seem like it'd be worth the premium.
Anyone else on HN a liveaboard, or interested in it? My email's in my profile.
Bond, on the other hand, is all about protecting the interests of (a subset of) the rich and powerful.
I bought a new car recently and when someone saw it, they said "what? you couldn't buy a used one? What a waste!"
Since it was a 2013 with ~60k miles on it and just very well maintained, their statement said more about them than me.
Outside of charity what else are these people going to do with their money? If they are already 60 there isn't much point investing it for the future unless it is about the next generation.
The less wasteful way would have been to have taxation laws that prevented them accumulating that level of wealth to begin with.