HN Theater @HNTheaterMonth

https://youtu.be/1bO8zEaSuWg

It's actually a fairly long tradition, it's only been online for the previous decade or so. I'ts easy to access, it's just that for the last few years, you can also see if someone has checked your taxes and who they are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bO8zEaSuWg

I suggest checking out Tom Scott's "In Norway, Everyone Can Know How Much You Earn", at https://youtu.be/1bO8zEaSuWg

And then, have a look at the bibliography in the video description!

Interesting video about somewhat public tax returns, and hence salary, in Norway and other Nordic countries.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bO8zEaSuWg

⬐ varjag

There was no "hence salary" part. The salary back-estimation was very rough, e.g. for my income the estimation by a popular calculator was off by 25%. Using past tense here because anonymous access to tax data is discontinued.

You could tell if someone was poor or rich based on that, but for comparing incomes in your cohort it was not very useful.

⬐ hkjgkjy

It works like that here in Sweden as well.

Fun story: in my teenage years, when dating my high school sweetheart, I went to visit her grandparents house for the first time.

Arriving at their house, the grandmother quickly pulls out her Taxeringskalender (taxation calendar - a paperback where a company has collected all this public information, and they sell it as a handy book). She begins to look up my surname and tells me how much my parents earn.

After having lived abroad (Japan, Germany and the UK) I've realized the Scandinavian system is weird at times, but they (or we) do their thing and everyone is kind of aiming at the same goal in society. Extreme transparency, and many striving for equality above all.

⬐ charlesdm

This doesn't sound like a fun story at all, actually. I honestly don't see what kind of good could come from disclosing tax returns publicly..

⬐ jellicle

Reduces gender discrimination; reduces race discrimination; reduces income inequality; allows employees to make sure they are being paid fairly for their skills; reduces tax evasion; increases trust in the system.

No doubt there are more that don't come to mind immediately.

⬐ jomamaxx

I'm not sure any of those things are true - and there are far better options for addressing those things.

Why don't you just force everyone to put their bank account statements online?

Privacy is a fundamental human right.

⬐ dmoy

I'm not sure it reduces race discrimination in Sweden. It's not as blatantly in your face, but it still affects people greatly.

⬐ jellicle

Reduces, not eliminates.

Presumably it is quite easy for employees to establish, for example, that all black employees at a company are poorly-paid compared to similar white employees. This makes redress possible. In the U.S. it is quite difficult to establish that, even if one has a strong suspicion that it is true, and so redress is rare.

⬐ Hermel

Social control. When everyone is watching, not properly declaring your income is much more risky.

⬐ charlesdm

The only advantage I could see is _PERHAPS_ combating excessive legal tax avoidance. But I doubt the people focusing on significant avoidance care enough to pay more, just to show off some sort of status. I know I wouldn't care enough to pay more.

⬐ ersii

So, how will they know "if" I'm keeping some of my income undeclared? Remember - this is the DECLARED income that is public.

⬐ patmcc

If you have a porsche but only make $15k a year (or whatever), that's a good indication you're not declaring everything.

⬐ charlesdm

You could have inherited $1m five years ago, though.

⬐ Zitrax

The data in Norway does not only include your income but also your fortune.

⬐ charlesdm

Even worse!

⬐ manarth

How is that calculated?

Cash in an account is fairly easy…but stocks and shares? Property assets? Cars/boats/aircraft? Furniture? Art? Intangible assets such as patents or licences?

⬐ charlesdm

You would probably have to self assess. Fortune and wealth taxes tend to cost more to collect than they bring in, because it's extremely hard and labour intensive to verify the submitted data. Aside from being an "equality tax" (which policy makers in a country might think is a good thing), it has very little use.

⬐ kalleboo

Snitches. "Oh, he bought a new car? But he only makes XXX a year... I'm gonna report him!"

⬐ igk

Yes, how devious. Reporting potential crimes

⬐ kalleboo

Sorry you're right, I edited my comment to remove the implication of jealousy

⬐ ersii

Shouldn't you report actual crimes? What kind of society do we get when everyone seemingly secretly or publicly hates each other so much that you'll report "potential crimes" in advance?

⬐ charlesdm

I can't believe this actually works. In Belgium we have a hotline, and the amount of "snitching" that happens increases YoY. I.e. some guy reports that his neighbour bought a new expensive BMW or Porsche. So they look into it.. and in 99.99% of the cases realise nothing is wrong. Envy is a sad beast..

Just because someone lives a normal life doesn't mean he's not wealthy. I could be living in a normal street/house, making a normal wage, and making €100,000 a year from investment gains. So what? Get over it.

⬐ zer0gravity

If you don't have anything to hide, or you don't want to trick people by paying less then the value they produce, then this kind of system is much better because it promotes honesty and a kind of mutual respect. It may seem strange at first but usually democracy and transparency go hand in hand.

Secrets are most of the time the tools of cheaters and liers...

⬐ jomamaxx

"If you don't have anything to hide, or you don't want to trick people by paying less then the value they produce, then this kind of system is much better because it promotes honesty and a kind of mutual respect. "

Why doesn't Sweden force everyone to publish their sexual history? Medical records? Amount of vacation time?

It's utterly absurd.

Your finances are your private information - unless there is a specific reason - it should be private.

This is a serious transgression of human rights.

⬐ lobster_johnson

> It's utterly absurd.

Your argument is literally argumentum ad absurdum. You can't show something to be absurd by pointing out that other, hypothetical non-existent things are absurd.

⬐ bjourne

Because by default, all government data is public. How much you pay in taxes is contained in government data. That's great for transparency, researchers and journalists and makes corruption much harder to get away with.

Only when there is a compelling reason to keep the data secret which outweighs the public interest (such as the identity of a rape victim) is the data kept secret. People being embarrassed by people finding out how much or little they earn isn't a compelling enough reason.

⬐ charlesdm

> That's great for transparency, researchers and journalists and makes corruption much harder to get away with.

So, I think in this case, "transparency", "researchers" and "journalists" are all highly irrelevant.

1. Journalists shouldn't write articles about how person X makes €Xm a year. The friend of my cousins husband was abducted when he was a kid, because the press kept writing articles about how wealthy his family was. Why? Just because they could sell a few newspapers. Despicable.

2. Researchers: the data could easily be anonymized.

3. Transparency. Why? Just because you say everything else is public isn't a valid reason (to me). It's not like you have a choice. Are you OK with a list of all of your assets being public? Every property you own, globally? The exact amount of money on your bank account? How about your medical history, so insurers can easily determine how healthy / sick you are? Or your sexual preference?

4. Corruption: BS. I would seriously doubt people would be stupid enough to receive “dirty" money and then declare it to the tax authority. And if they were, they'd probably route it through a company as consulting fees or something.. Be realistic, please.

⬐ hkjgkjy

I think for non-scandinavians, you just have to accept that this is how we do things up north. There is the principle of being public (offentlighetsprincipen). It states that, if there are no extraordinary reasons to keep government data private (such as threat to somebody's life), the data should be public. The internal revenue authority is a government body, hence it's data should be public.

Sweden, Norway, Iceland and Finland (don't know if Denmark applies this system) are all well-functioning societies. I would not be surprised if they are some of the world's most well-functioning places around (which is great for getting shit done, but not always fun and free). Ideas of what is right and wrong in other cultures (such as mainland europeans and americans wish for financial privacy) might not always apply in the culture up north. That's fine.

⬐ friendzis

1. Should journalists write articles about how company X made €Y in profits last year? What about self-employed/single-person-companies?

2. As it was stated properly anonymized data would only allow faceting by absolute income and researchers are interested in many other facets.

3. I'm not from Norway (know some people there) so might be mistaken, but as far as I understand only 3 things are public: income, asset-value, tax. Income and asset structure (income may be wage or interest, assets might be cash in a sock/bank, shares or a house) are not disclosed. Health insurers ask you certain questions about your family health (e.g. any known cancer cases for 2 generations or whatever) and it is contract violation and possibly criminal offense to lie. More on this in side note.

4. The very reason a lot of corruption is gotten away with is simply capacity of tax authorities to dig deep, not the clever routing itself.

Side note: As far as I have observed, it is more or less cultural habit in Scandinavia to be obsessed with what I call "what would others think?". Practically this surfaces in two areas: 1. being really conservative about what is considered acceptable (count number of house colors in a neighbourhood :) ) 2. attempts to be better than your neighbour, which increases welfare

⬐ bjourne

> 1. Journalists shouldn't write articles about how person X makes €Xm a year.

I disagree. If some CEO says that workers salaries are too high and he himself increased his salary by 50% the last year, that is important for journalists to write about.

> 2. Researchers: the data could easily be anonymized.

Researches are interested in seeing how different variables correlate with salary. Like gender, age, education level, parents social status and so on. Those correlations can't be made on anonymized data.

> 3. Transparency. Why? Just because you say everything else is public isn't a valid reason (to me).

You misunderstand. Transparency is about the government being transparent with it's data, not about ME being transparent. I'm allowed to keep as many secrets as I want -- the government is not. For example if the government had records on my sexual preference or political affiliation, I for sure would prefer if that data was public and not kept secret.

> 4. Corruption: BS. I would seriously doubt people would be stupid enough to receive “dirty" money and then declare it to the tax authority.

A lot of corruption involves one party "gifting" the other something. That kind of corruption has been caught by the tax authority.

⬐ charlesdm

> A lot of corruption involves one party "gifting" the other something. That kind of corruption has been caught by the tax authority.

Like what? A house? You can't really catch cash transactions.

I would assume that in developed economies the "easiest" and least transparent way of corruption happening is friends doing each other favours. I.e. person A can influence the granting of permits through his friend, person B. In return for helping person C get a permit, he gets a board seat in the company of person D, via person C.

⬐ None

None

⬐ widforss

That's just weird. Social rule number one: don't look up somebody in the Taxeringskalender when they are in the same room.

⬐ johannes1234321

For me this is only fair - why do it in their back if you do it anyways. The more relevant question is: why at all? The granddaughter could choose herself ...

⬐ Numberwang

Grandmothers don't need to follow social rules though. Special exemption rule.

⬐ deanclatworthy

It's the same in Finland. Tax rates are fairly easy to discover for anyone. And based off that you can get a very good idea of their earnings.

In practice I've never met or spoken to anyone who has gone out their way to do this. It's normally just the tabloids outing the salaries of politicians and celebrities once a year.

⬐ nawitus

One recruiter said that he'll find out my salary from my tax return when I said I didn't want to disclose it to him. By the way, I think the actual income is public knowledge, not the tax rate.

⬐ deanclatworthy

Pretty bad recruiter by the sounds of it. I've never been asked my current salary. Only expected salary.

I expect he/she was calling got bluff.

⬐ bitJericho

It's actually one if those signals that the company is no good.

⬐ stevekemp

I'm a recent newcomer to Finland, and I've never been tempted.

But I've loved looking things up in the naming-registry; seeing how many people in the country share my forename/surname has been fascinating.

⬐ whack

If I had access to such information, I would immediately try to figure out how much my colleagues and peers in other groups/companies are making. Knowing how much other people are making for similar job functions, gives you huge negotiating power in managing your career. It's a net win for all workers in society.

⬐ Tharkun

Have you considered the alternative approach of talking to people? A lot less creepy than cyber stalking their tax reports.

⬐ ivoras

From my experience, this is one case where both sides are entrenched and refuse to accept the logic of the other side.

Same as the "prices should be stated with taxes included or not" debate. Good luck with that in the US. And with the metric system. And in other countries, driving on the left side of the road. It's culture, not logic.

⬐ henrikschroder

> prices should be stated with taxes included or not

In the US, sales tax differs wildly from state to state, and even from city to city. If you always had to include tax, you couldn't have any TV commercials where a company boasts about their price on something they sell, because it would be impossible to know how high the sales tax would be for every person watching.

Places where tax always has to be included usually has a national sales tax or similar, making it possible to advertise prices with tax included.

⬐ ivoras

I don't disagree with you.

I will just notice it somehow isn't a problem in the EU, where taxes differ wildly.

Hence, culture.

⬐ gsnedders

And my experience in both Sweden and Norway is most people will just say, without judgement, because after all it's public anyway.

⬐ PunchTornado

not reliable. a lot of my friends were saying they were earning much more than were really making. made me depressed for quit a while.

then I got a wonderful job as a data admin for an intelligence institution and for a few days when certain maintenance was due I had unlimited access to everyone's earning in my country. THE LIES!

I always have issues negotiating my wage so knowing what other people are earning would imprive my bargaining power.

⬐ lord_harrington

did you try using your newfound powers for science as well? wage gap numbers are presumably drawn from smaller numbers in countries without public tax returns, actually computing this nationwide would be amazing

⬐ PunchTornado

I could just execute individual queries and fake them as tests unfortunately. I did it only for friends and public figures. But I think what you are saying is done by other institutions in most countries. I regularly see our national statistics institute releasing studies about gender pay gap etc.

⬐ ajmurmann

Wow, THAT is creepy! Did you get fired?

⬐ PunchTornado

nope, I faked them as tests and anyway there was no pressure about it. it was relaxed, never got a question about it.

my point is that for people with poor negotiating skills, like me, knowing how much other people make would have helped me when I was younger.

⬐ None

None

⬐ None

None

⬐ HarryHirsch

I did, here at Tumbleweed State College. The request was met with puzzlement, even indignation. The explanation that secrecy about salaries benefits only management caused even greater outrage, as did pointing out that Tumbleweed State is in an open records state, where salaries of state employees are available online or can be obtained through a FOIA request.

At times, people are plain dumb.

⬐ digi_owl

Keep in mind that at least in Norway it is common that unions do collective bargaining. Never mind that there is no legally mandated minimum salary.

All in all it is a two way street. We are in this together, so we all pull together etc.

⬐ varjag

You can't look up other peoples' tax anonymously in Norway though since 2013. Your person of interest gets an automatic notification.

⬐ gruez

Pay some random guy to do it for you?

⬐ jdhzzz

Uber for salaries.

⬐ maffeis

Italy did the same in 2008, publishing a list with 2005 tax returns info, causing public uproars. The list was then removed (and never been published again) after the Italian Data Protection Authority ruled it infringed citizens' privacy.

Needless to say, the data is still available through P2P networks: https://torrentproject.se/?t=redditi+2005

⬐ protomyth

I'm sure that would be just peachy when the company you work for runs all its employees and notices that you reported more income than they are paying you. It was bad enough when I worked under a government grant so my salary was public. I prefer privacy.

⬐ giraffehack

Might be me missing something cultural here.

1. Why would you report that you earn more than you do, then you would just pay more tax than you had to?

2. Why would the employer care that you earn more in total than they pay you?

⬐ pmorici

Because you have a second job / side business / investment income that is independent of your primary job.

⬐ giraffehack

Alright, but why is that a problem? Might be a cultural difference thing that i'm not seeing.

If you signed with the employer to not have any side business going on then it's a different story. But you would know this in the first place, so you would only complain about not being allowed to shoot yourself in the foot.

⬐ loeg

Most businesses paying a salary expect (and sometimes encode in your employment contract) that it is your sole job. They don't want the stress, mental fatigue, and time commitments of a second job competing with your work for them.

(This is my understanding, as a person living in the US anyway.)

⬐ Svenskunganka

If you look from it from an employers standpoint, that employee might not be around for much longer if his/hers side-business kicks off. It can be hard to find candidates that can replace that employee.

If the employee makes more money from that business than from yours, the employee has literally nothing to lose and may start to become sloppy with their work, not take it as seriously as he/she should, etc.

I'd say it's all about control.

⬐ gsnedders

So it's one thing to imagine you're a programmer who does a small amount of contracting on the side; now imagine you're a teacher who does some "mild" sex work (say, solo camming): the social and financial repercussions on them having their second job disclosed is a real risk. Even from the employer's point-of-view, it's a risk to their reputation for hiring such a person (there again, such a thing seems unlikely to be considered good enough reason to dismiss someone outside of their probationary period in Norway).

⬐ igk

So how exactly would they find out how you earn that money? And why would they have the right to terminate you if it's not in the original contract?

⬐ amelius

I think the bigger problem lies in salary negotiations with a new employer.

⬐ ginko

When would that be the case? When you have another job on the side? How is that your employer's business?

⬐ sidlls

In the US there is a not small number of employers who take a very negative view of moonlighting. This is true in every industry, and in knowledge work industries like software it is compounded by a fear of IP theft. So whether it should be their business or not doesn't matter: they'll make it their business.

⬐ wyager

>How is that your employer's business?

Exactly. That's why public income info is a bad idea.

⬐ RodericDay

Public income info means it is much much easier to negotiate against HR.

You know exactly how much x or y makes given a or b. This is info that HR has, because they pay for it. If it was public, you'd have it too.

Your bosses also would not be allowed to guilt-trip you into foregoing a raise without them taking on a comparable part of the burden.

Salary secrecy seems like a quintessentially american thing, completely at odds with faith in markets. If you believe in markets, let the labor markets do the best job they possibly can, by informing agents within them and tearing down information asymmetries.

⬐ z3t4

I believe in markets. But in Sweden schools can fix wages by only allowing X amount of people to get a degree per year ... At least for those jobs that require a license.

⬐ sidlls

Salary transparency is different from tax and income transparency, though.

I agree that salary information should be more public. I'm not so sure individual income or other tax information should be.

⬐ lettergram

Personally, (I'm less than 25) I make about 75% of my income from the company I work at, the other 25% doing odd jobs, websites, etc. That latter percentage is probably increasing every month too.

I can't imagine the company I work at being super excited I'm (for example) doing code reviews; or running a website. Technically, I don't have a clause in my contract forbidding me from doing external work, so long as I give the company 40 hours a week.

I know I am not alone. I know one co-worker makes about a half a million a year in an external business selling car parts. He just works at the company for fun essentially, since he is allowed to play with the entire companies system architecture.

⬐ friendzis

I'm just a little bit worried. You state that you do part time websites, your co-worker is doing system architecture, so I'm assuming software related job. Double check your contract and related documents, because while most contracts do not forbid working part time, pretty common clause is forbidding to compete or work for you employer's competitors. Currently I have CEO signed document explicitly allowing me to work part time in a completely unrelated company :)

⬐ danso

Why do you feel justified in assuming what your company would think? And how do you justify working at such a place with the kind of corporate moral code that would punish employees for behavior not defined in the employment contract?

There are plenty of scenarios in which an employer believes that they deserve to know how their employee conducts themselves outside of work, including other jobs, and in those scenarios, this should be specified in the contract. In the news business, working for someone who might intersect with your beat, e.g. making phone calls for the local chapter of Democrats if you're covering politics, will often result in a severe reprimand if not firing. If you want to be a schoolteacher, you can be fired for having worked in porn, even if those days are over. [0]

[0] http://www.cbsnews.com/news/stacie-halas-fired-calif-teacher...

⬐ lettergram

Sure there are plenty of scenarios where that might be fine. However, I'm sure every business is not the same and I know some of my managers would be offended.

⬐ manarth

> "how do you justify working at such a place with the kind of corporate moral code that would punish employees for behavior not defined in the employment contract"

I've worked for a few organisations where the contract has included clauses on exclusivity and IP assignment.

Each time I've asked for those clauses to be removed before joining them, and each time they've agreed.

⬐ widforss

You guys might be intererested in the Swedish site lexbase.se. They asked the courts for five years of records, cross-ran them with the population registration and presented the data using a search prompt taking a name or address as search terms.

This is normally illegal as it violates some integrity laws, but it is ok under current legislation if you have a "utgivningsbevis", something you need to register for to use your freedom of speech in published writing.

The site was poorly built and their full database was leaked nearly instantly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexbase

⬐ klausjensen

When I lived in Norway, I found this to be a pointless violation of my privacy. Still do.

⬐ Svenskunganka

Well, it's a different culture here in Scandinavia. Personally, I couldn't care less if anyone wanted to look up my salary - whether it is a recruiter or someone else. I have my own valuation of my time and skills and if a potential employer can't meet that, there's someone else who will.

Having this mindset will help sift out companies that you probably wouldn't want to work for in the first place.

⬐ walshemj

But it reduces your ability to negotiate its also acts to keep the lower orders in their place as an atypical candidate my have started out at a lower salary and so be les likely to progress to the same level as some one born with a silver spoon in their mouth

⬐ manarth

> it reduces your ability to negotiate

It can also increase your ability to negotiate: "This person does the same job as me. That work is value at $X, so I should also be paid $X."

⬐ Svenskunganka

It's easy to say that without looking at the countries we're talking about here. The nordic countries are the closest places on earth to "everyone born equally". We all have access to the same education and healthcare, whether our parents have money or not (since it is fully government-funded through taxes).

⬐ kalleboo

Not to mention the strength of unions and collective bargaining (maybe not in tech in particular though)

⬐ Broken_Hippo

In a way, that goes both ways. In Norway, management is as likely to have a union as the employee. The factory my spouse works at, negotiations are usually done between the unions. A little over half the employees have a union, and from what I understand folks can choose their union. You might have a different work contract than the person standing next to you because of different unions or one having a lack of a union.

⬐ klausjensen

I do not think about it in relation to recruiting at all, in a much broader perspective.

With regards to what I consider to be private information, I just do not think it is the job of the government to publish it.

(I am Scandinavian as well, by the way, although I have chosen to leave - excessive taxation being one on a list of reasons).

⬐ lervag

I think it is important to note that you can only see the amount of tax payed, not the actual income. This obviously correlates with strongly with income, but there are a lot of factors that affect the amount of tax payed. Person A and B with the same income might pay a very different amount of taxes.

As others have also noted, if I wanted to learn the income of a fellow Norwegian, he would be notified that I had requested this info. This prevents a lot of snooping. I would suspect newspapers and magazines to be among those who request income information the most, and then typically they request information about the wealthiest and most powerful.

⬐ aukaost

Same thing in Iceland. There's a magazine published every year with salaries of notable persons divided by sector.

⬐ fowlerpower

This is even more interesting when companies do it. There are many startups these days that are pushing radical transparency and you actually know what everyone makes in the company.

I think this builds trust and frees people up from the anxiety of not knowing if they are getting screwed. The other thing is all high performing individuals in society, athletes, actors what have you, their salaries are know.

This isn't as radical as you might think and I think it has benefits for society.

⬐ walshemj

Such as ?

⬐ henrijuntunen

Buffer: https://open.buffer.com/introducing-open-salaries-at-buffer-...

⬐ Zitrax

Coming from Sweden and being used to public tax records I was nevertheless a bit surprised at the transparency in Norway when anyone could look up anyone online anonymously. It made it extremely simple to for example create list of everyone at work or on your street (or use the data for any purpose). They later changed it in 2011 (?) such that the other person will get notified about who looked him/her up. I don't know if any other Nordic country went as far as Norway did during those years ?

There was an estimate that Norwegians spent around 250.000 work hours per year looking up each other in the tax databases.

There were also mobile apps being made when the databases were public that could for example show the richest people nearby.

⬐ mongol

It was the same in Sweden when Ratsit first opened. Around 2007 or so. And you can still do it for a charge, but the subject will be notified.

⬐ digi_owl

It used to be that each year the reported income and paid tax was printed and placed in a public location (local post office etc). Then some braniac thought they could save some money by just putting it all online. End result was that scrapers were set up etc.

⬐ Animats

That used to be the case in the Washington, DC area, back when almost everybody was a GS-graded government employee. There was a wallet card with the GS levels and number of years in grade, showing the salary levels. That told you what someone made.

⬐ anovikov

I'd say it's a bad thing: a lot of consumption is a result of people's desire to show off. When everyone knows who makes what anyway, trying to show off will be stupid, so that activity will stop - severely hitting consumption, business revenues, profits, and the economy in general, probably resulting in a vicious cycle as people's incomes will be hit by bad business.

Scandinavia may be exception from that because showing off isn't in their mentality anyway, so benefits (main of which is that more and more reliable information makes things better for economic agents) outweigh disadvantages. Not going to work well for most other countries.

⬐ Kiro

I must be naive but I thought this was public information in most countries.

⬐ manarth

Would you mind saying which country you live in?

I'm from the UK, where income/tax is private, and my understanding is that this is the same in the USA, and most European countries.

It's interesting that what's "normal" to me is so alien and unexpected to other people.

⬐ Kiro

Sweden.

⬐ hkjgkjy

I think it's common in Scandinavia, and when moving out of the peninsula for the first time I was chocked that it wasn't like that for everyone. Now I feel queasy about having that data public.

⬐ ACS_Solver

I have the opposite experience, I moved to Scandinavia (Sweden), and this is still one of the weirder things to me. I like the ideas of transparency in general that are prevalent, but I don't see how publishing the tax returns of individual citizens working in the private sector contributes to transparency.

⬐ manarth

The advantage that I can see to that transparency is the potential for reducing income inequality based on gender, ethnicity, etc. Whether that's effective is another question.

⬐ Kiro

The transparency goes a long way in Sweden. You can call the tax office and say "I want this person and all his relatives' social security numbers, income statements, address history etc etc". They can't question it and you don't need any reason.

⬐ mchaver

Genuinely curious, have there ever been issues of people abusing this? It could possibly be an issue if someone wants to use that information to harass/follow/stalk someone.

⬐ Kiro

I've seen some pretty crazy doxing I think would be hard to do in other countries but I've never seen the system be questioned in media.

⬐ ACS_Solver

I still don't see how this is a boost to transparency. I tend to think of transparency in terms of the government being transparent, not me being able to get information on random people. How does society as a whole benefit when I can check my neighbor's income?

I'm also slightly uneasy with services like hitta.se, though I am not as paranoid as I used to be. It's possible to see the average income in some residential area as well. So if someone checks that, then checks the people living there individually, and notices that my income is significantly above average for the area, then my place is more attractive as a break-in target.

It would seem more sensible to me if that information were available given a legitimate need, such as planning to make a deal with some person.

⬐ Kiro

Not saying anything about that. When I say "transparency" I mean it's public. Not putting any other value in the word.

⬐ xlance

They recently made a small change to this. Now you can see a list of people who have checked your income.

A lot of people stopped snooping after this change.

⬐ fert46

Farmer's subsidies are also public knowledge in the EU and are routinely printed in papers. That lets you know appropriately their gross income. I can't see that happening for other sectors of society who benefit from government support.

⬐ keiferski

The Law of Jante is the description of a pattern of group behaviour towards individuals within Scandinavian communities that negatively portrays and criticises individual success and achievement as unworthy and inappropriate. The Jante Law as a concept was created by the Dano-Norwegian author Aksel Sandemose who, in his novel A Fugitive Crosses His Tracks (En flyktning krysser sitt spor, 1933, English translation published in the USA in 1936), identified the Law of Jante as ten rules. Sandemose's novel portrays the small Danish town Jante (modelled upon his native town Nykøbing Mors as it was at the beginning of the 20th century, but typical of all small towns and communities), where nobody is anonymous.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante

⬐ widforss

What? You cannot do this in every democratic country?

The government should be transparent, therefore everything the government bodies do that does not obviously need to be protected should be public.

⬐ donretag

Many governments (state and local) are required to publish the salaries of THEIR employees. They cannot pass laws (here in the US) to require the same from employees in the private sector, but they can for public employees.

⬐ widforss

Is that because some "businesses are people" and fifth amendment rights?

⬐ johannes1234321

For the government being transparent you have to know what the government collects. But for that it doesn't matter what a single person earns and pays.

This might be more relevant with corporate taxes (where authorities make deals to keep a company in one location), subsidiaries or donations to political parties (which aim for influence)

⬐ widforss

Touché. However, I will continue to think that it is completely normal, as will most scandinavians ;)

⬐ TheOtherHobbes

I think all public, private and corporate financial transactions, including cash transactions, should be public, with absolutely no expectation of privacy or avoidance through clever financial engineering or creative accounting.

Every single transaction. Ever. In the whole world. Recorded permanently.

It would be the fastest way to end political corruption. It would also shine some light on who the world's richest people really are, and how they make and spend their money.

⬐ None

None

⬐ johannes1234321

This would also be the fastest way to end all privacy. What I read, what I eat and with who and also which medicine I take.

Transparency for political decisions is important as is privacy.

⬐ bfuller

Salaries for non profit workers are public in the USA

⬐ kajjffkk

Less laws please.

⬐ None

None

⬐ None

None

⬐ RodericDay

I really wish that someone who is really opposed to salary-transparency would do a comprehensive pro- vs con- analysis of the issue, displaying that they truly understand all the arguments for. A lot of the opposition seems so glib and content with the status quo, showing very little charity to the idea, often based on very contrived scenarios, or on the failure of isolated one-off efforts (one factory switched, this happened...).

Yes, it's true, you lose some privacy and there's weird stalking scenarios that could occur. However, on a social level, the positive mass externalities seem huge:

- Fundamentally hardcore pro-market: More information makes for better economic agents. Full stop.

- Undermine the status arms-race to display wealth.

- Immediate career education for all kids everywhere. No more "wow I didn't know x job paid y", it's all out there in the open.

- Easier to negotiate against big entities like HR as a "little guy" because you have similar info to them (which they pay for).

- Less race/sex/etc based discrimination.

- Bosses cannot ask workers to tighten their belts without also tightening their own.

- Allow people to tie vague concepts ("how are teachers valued by society?") to real, meaningful personal experiences ("George is a great teacher and making a pittance compared to Greg the salesman!")

I don't know. I'm totally into the idea. It seems like a thing that both hardcore free-market libertarians and left-wing people pining for the proletariat or w/e could both readily agree upon and promote together. The bulk of the opposition seems to be a fear of what could be done with the information, but the information is basically all out there already, in the hands of the people who already have a lot of power. Your boss drives a nicer car than you, and his boss an even nicer one. This would just let you actually do math with the numbers and calculate whether you want to shop around for jobs, rather than stay stuck with a vague impression.

⬐ jomamaxx

" Easier to negotiate against big entities like HR as a "little guy" because you have similar info to them (which they pay for)."

This if upside down - in fact - it will reinforce class.

Do you know why your employer may ask in an interview: 'How much did you earn before'? Because they know if they offer you a little bit more than before, you'll probably take it - even if it's 'under market wages'.

Someone who earns very little can be held to that lower income, and there's also a social stigma to it: if you're a low-income earner - you will be judged as less valuable than high income earners.

People will judge the value of people by how much they earn - making it very difficult for working class people or students to move up.

Also - it's a deep transgression of human rights. Your finances are your private information, nobody should have the right to see them unless there is a case for 'public good' i.e. public officials etc.

Also - your idea of libertarian in this case is a little upside down - this is the opposite of classical liberalism. It's massive government overreach. Classical liberals would be very weary of having the government interfere in one's private life.

By your logic - your bank account, your investments, land holdings etc. etc. could feasibly be public knowledge.

All of those supposed 'good things' are intangible - there's no evidence they will happen (or are good). It's classic socialist folly: a 'do gooder idea that really is just more state control.

I have no doubt that in some cases, income could be public information - for example, state officials should have to publish certain kinds of information - especially stock ownership and business contracts so that we can ward off corruption.

But in general, we should be deferring to privacy.

⬐ andythro77

hi, am Doris, i had my friend help me hack my ex's email, facebook, whatsapp,and his phone cause i suspected he was cheating. all he asked for was a his phone number. he's email is ([email protected])..IF u need help tell him Doris, referred you to him and he'll help. Am sure his going to help you do it, good luck

⬐ jomamaxx

This is a serious transgression of privacy and human rights.

There is utterly no reason why most people should not most other people's income.

Unless they are public reps, or have government dealings - or there is some kind of 'public good' - than this is basically an abuse of human rights.

Why not make people's bank account statements or health records public?

⬐ Numberwang

I don't see human rights coming down either side of the argument here. It's about what type of society you want to live in. Scandinavia tend to want to identify as a more social culture whereas others will want an individual based society.

I think the one word someone from the outside should take with them about Scandinavia is "relax". Most things like these matter less than you think.

⬐ manarth

> I don't see human rights coming down either side of the argument here.

Article 12 [1] begins "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy"

I don't agree that publishing income is a breach of human rights, but I can see how people would argue that point.

[1] http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/

⬐ Numberwang

Well they can argue that way, but they would fail.

arbitrary: "based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system."

⬐ jomamaxx

Why don't you tell Chinese citizens who have government control their online behaviour 'for the purposes of social betterment' to 'relax'?

"Scandinavia tend to want to identify as a more social culture whereas others will want an individual based society."

Why do you speak for 100% of Scandinavians? How about the large portion of those who want nothing to do with this law? Shouldn't they be able to opt out? Let those who want to 'be social' (as you say it) publish their information online. The rest can have their basic rights to privacy protected.

While I agree that it's probably not a huge deal overall - it is definitely a issue of rights and privacy, and a fairly serious one.

⬐ Numberwang

We have something called democracy going on up north. We decide our laws by vote. So those that are on the losing side of an issue will just have to live with it until laws change. Similarly to how various restrictions apply to drugs in the US.

⬐ subzeross

Norway is no different from all rich oil-producing countries. Just selling oil is not that hard, but what will happen when Norway run out of oil?

⬐ billhathaway

Norway is handling their oil wealth pretty responsibly and have a huge (U.S. $873 billion) government fund based on petroleum profits[0]. This American Life ran a podcast segment on it back in 2011 which was interesting[1].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Pension_Fund_of_Nor... [1] http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/08/26/139972557/the-f...

⬐ cylinder

Live off dividends and enjoy their lives. Fund education, science, art, creativity, leisure.

Or they could blow it on pointless wars and invasions I guess?

⬐ tokai

They will live off their fund.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Pension_Fund_of_Nor...

⬐ EliRivers

I expect owning 1% of all the stocks and bonds in the world will see them do just fine.

⬐ manarth

I can't see the relationship between Norway being an oil-producing country, and the content of the article, which is that Norway publishes the records of residents' personal income.

Do other oil-producing countries usually do that? I've not heard that said about Saudi Arabia, for example.

⬐ Broken_Hippo

I'm an immigrant in Norway. There are a lot of notable exceptions between oil-producing nations. They found oil later than a lot of other nations (late 60's), and took steps upfront to not get in the same situation. In the country itself, electric cars are subsidized (and have benefits). Gas is taxed pretty well. Having a vehicle is expensive. Clean energy is encouraged. They took the money they've made with oil and invested it in a lot of different industries and they use the interest and profits from that to fun public programs, though lots of stuff is taxed and that tax is used as well.

The fund itself is pretty diverse, and the folks have a philosopher or two on board.

The whole point is that from what I see, no one sees it as something that will last forever. The country is already planning on such things. What exactly the plan is, I haven't a clue, but I sleep better at night knowing that folks smarter (or with more influence) than I are thinking in such ways. From what I can tell, it is a mix of proactive and prudent.

⬐ newintellectual

I have an idea. Everybody mind their own fucking business, and stop trying to pry into everyone else's.

⬐ nickez

I would prefer the other way around. Everything regarding the state should be open, even how much you pay in taxes.

⬐ Zitrax

In Portugal they are apparently kind of doing the opposite of Norway - publishing who did not pay the tax: http://www.e-financas.gov.pt/de/pubdiv/de-devedores.html

⬐ newintellectual

I have an idea. Everybody mind their own fucking business and stop prying into everyone elses.

⬐ jkot

Norway has zero transparency when it comes to children rights. Some governments (Slovak, Czech, Romania) recommend not to travel there with children.

EDIT: Some explanations.

- In Norway social services (Barnevernet) can take children from family without any explanation.

- Parents are under gag order, and can not talk about their case. Talking to press means you loose parental rights.

- There is no appeal, proof, or any oversight.

- Barnevernet does not release ANY details about cases. It is to protect children.

- No details are released even if child is already dead (suicide) and does not need protection.

- Bernevernet has zero oversight, it does not even allow foreign social workers to look into their materials.

- People who work for Bernevernet can also work for private companies which provide child care (unique in Europe). So person who decides on child removal may have direct financial benefit from doing so.

- Siblings are often split and placed far apart (8 hours drive).

- Removed children must speak Norwegian, mother tongue is suppressed (siblings are split). Foster parents often do not have common language with children.

- Relatives of children (grandparents, aunties, divorced parents) have zero chance to get custody.

- Anonymous surveys (parents are under gag order) indicate there are thousands of such cases (Norway is very small country). Mostly immigrants.

⬐ czechdeveloper

Problem is, that they don't discuss the cases with anyone (because of children protection). They may all be valid abuse cases, but they will just not present any data about them.

In most famous case in Czech, I believe it was real abuse. Despite that common Czech perception is that is was basically misunderstanding. In other cases I'm not so sure, but I miss lots of data.

It's also not about basic travel, but living there.

But it all comes to the rules. You live there, you must adapt. Czech are crazy when immigrants don't adapt/integrate, but they don't want to do the same abroad.

⬐ jkot

I believe you are talking about Michaláková. She lost parental rights because she talked to press.

http://zpravy.idnes.cz/norsko-michalakova-soud-0w5-/domaci.a...

⬐ ced

What do you mean? What can happen?

⬐ EliRivers

Norway is big on protecting children. In particular, some things that seem normal in some cultures - open-handed slaps, whipping them with a belt or other such weapon - are illegal.

There have been some cases recently where children have been removed from their families, and because Norway is so big on protecting children, they don't release to the press the details of the cases.

I suspect that some of the outcry might be because of these two facts; because "of course" it's ridiculous to take children from their families because of a little physical punishment, and combined with the information vacuum, rumours and supposition take the place of fact. There will also be a strong correlation between immigrant families (from physical punishment cultures) and the application of physical punishment, which will make the stats look odd at first glance.

⬐ Broken_Hippo

I'm an immigrant in Norway. I do not have children, but have heard the stories. I used to hear some of the same stories in the American system, which also tends to not release details to protect the children.

Norway has strict laws about children and children have rights. These laws aren't bent because one is from another culture and living here. For example, physical punishment is pretty common in the US, but it is outright illegal here. It is seen as child abuse. If you have a drug problem, you might get your children taken away until you get yourself straigtened out. Sometimes you have to have classes or observation, and sometimes your children are removed until you do so. And honestly, from what I've seen with other immigrants, so long as you are following Norwegian law with the child, there isn't a problem.

> Parents are under gag order. This is to protect the children. You see, if everyone finds out about it, they might treat the child differently or it might cause hardship or embarrass the child. And equality between kids is really important, so this sort of thing is avoided.

> There is no appeal, proof, or any oversight. This is simply untrue. It might take time to appeal, but one can. Proof is an odd thing, and if things aren't clear upfront, they will take steps to make sure that the child won't be in danger if it is true. One has avenues to get help, but one must work within the system and take the steps. I don't know how well they work with foreign social workers, but again, if it is illegal in the country, you might be out of luck. People usually are expected to follow the laws of the country they are in.

> Does not release any details about cases, to protect children... even if child is already dead. Again, to protect children. In the case that the child dies, this is truly more to protect what might be innocent parties involved.

> Siblings are often split This is not unique to Norway. Sometimes this is the only way to keep kids safe: Other times, this is done while the investigation is going on so that one child doesn't influence the others.

> Removed children must speak Norwegian, the mother tongue is suppressed. First, the kids will learn once they get school age - or earlier, if they are in kindergarden. It would be expected if they live here for an extended time because otehrwise they will be singled out. This really is just an effect of living in a foreign country. Finding safe homes with speakers of every language would be very difficult, and again. Better to find safe homes. This isn't something deliberate to harm people.

> relatives of children have zero chance to get custody. I don't know for sure, but I doubt this is true and more rumor than anything. It would depend on the situation. In some cases, there would be little chance because the relative wouldn't keep the child removed from the threat (parents), but other cases, it might be possible.

> anonymous surveys... Proof, man. Otherwise this is just rumor.

⬐ jkot

I would recommend you to research this a bit more, if you decide to have a children. Problem are not 'strict laws', but the way there are applied. One single accusation can remove your children, you have no right to even talk to a lawyer and maybe in 6 years you will get some sort of appeal.

Sources are all over internet, Norway is only country with this problem, just google it.

⬐ Broken_Hippo

The stuff you are citing, btw, is basically an accepted conspiracy theory as well. The problem is that it really isn't the truth as you are stating it.

⬐ DanBC

You don't seem to be aware of it, but the Norwegian model is frequently criticised as being too severe.

There's probably some court case about to happen to protect the rights of children because the Norwegian model is too severe.

Here's one example of international concern about the severity of the system: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-36026458

Those parents hit their children, and so the parents need punishment for that bit of abuse, and the children need to be protected, but that protection should not be removal from the family because that's a significant interference with the rights of the child.

⬐ Broken_Hippo

I am actually aware of the other side of it as well. I generally tend to agree with some of the severity, especially in abuse cases. I'd rather things swing on the side of keeping children safe than the opposite, especially in abuse cases. The right they are upholding is that children should live in a violence free household. That law is pretty strict. There is good and bad with the methods, and that tends to be the case anywhere.

I do think with cultural differences, perhaps not enough upfront education is done - and cultural differences are part of the issue. It is difficult for parents to figure out what is and isn't allowed. However, I think the current EU/Schengen Area free movement policies probably hinder such a thing and I'm not sure how to educate a continent of people about such things.

I also realize that much like the states, most of the folks that speak out have been in some sort of trouble with them. It wasn't much different in the states - child protective services was invisible until someone had an issue with them. In general, neither place comments on ongoing cases in the protection of children.

The folks I've met that have dealt with them: One person simply had a meeting or two and a follow up, as there wasn't much to say about it. The other was having meetings in their house weekly for a bit plus some parenting classes. Both were immigrants. I know the system isn't always harsh.

And then there is the entire matter of ... well, honestly, most folks expect others to follow the laws of the country they are in. Can't very well have a different system for immigrants than citizens.

⬐ jkot

Yeah, Czech, Slovak, Lithuanian governments all got diplomatically involved for conspiracy theory.

http://www.businessinsider.com/ap-norway-accused-of-unfairly...

⬐ Broken_Hippo

And some politicians in the US deny evolution and publicly deny climate change.

⬐ Broken_Hippo

The thing is, I've not seen it. I've known a few immigrants, one from Poland, that has had them called. One had observation and classes, the other nothing. I'm not saying that any of it is perfect, as it isn't that anywhere, but what you are saying isn't either.

⬐ jkot

I think we are on a different planets.

I just told you parent is not even allowed to talk to a lawyer, if such thing happens and escalates.

⬐ Broken_Hippo

Dude, there are lawyers that specialize in this. If it wasn't allowed, they wouldn't be able to advertise and specialise in that field. Here is an example, in norwegian so you might have to use translate: http://osloadvokatene.no/privat/familie-arv-skifte/barn/6-go...

⬐ jkot

Of course it is not forbidden, but is not in 'best interest of child'. It will take a bit longer if lawyer is involved and reduces your chances.

Here is a czech case, women loses parental rights because she published her case. She still works in Norway kindergarten...

She has long history with lawyers, her original lawyer was removed from case (against her will), second lawyer was not even allowed on hearing...

http://zpravy.idnes.cz/norsko-michalakova-soud-0w5-/domaci.a...

Anyway, I do not live in norway, good luck.

⬐ maaaats

Is this comment based on the single, recent case that has been severely misrepresented in religious circles?

⬐ jkot

There are a few thousands such cases, mostly in east-european countries. It is recommended not to bring your family to Norway, if you find job there.

⬐ msh

What is this referring to?

⬐ jkot

Barnevernet, social services, child abduction.

⬐ msh

That's not really helpful. For anyone to make sense of it you need to put in more details or references.

⬐ olavgg

In Norway we have a very aggressive child protection organization called "Barnevernet". Everything that is considered normal child care in other countries, may be very wrong here. There recently was an indian couple that lost the right to take care of their children, because they punished them by for example eating from the floor when they did not behave. This is very common in India. I believe after a while they got their children back as they got more educated.

So if you have plans to move your familiy here, you have to adapt to our culture of child care. On the other hand, this organization will more often catch and follow-up children in homes which could be dangerous for them. In that way we can prevent that the children will have social issues when they are grown ups which is a benefit for our society as whole.

⬐ gdwatson

If the government will not release its claims or what evidence it has for them, how can you be confident the case has been misrepresented?

⬐ intothemild

Here in Oslo I was in a startup where we had a British CEO. He argued about me keeping my pay rise secret. I said there's no such thing. We all know what we earn. It's public.

He was shocked. Then next day decided to tell everyone it was a fireable offence to disclose your salary.

Which we then said. That the action of making it a fireable offence is actually illegal and a fireable offence.

(He quit a number of months later)

⬐ draw_down

Sounds like a stupid asshole.

⬐ reitanqild

Norway is crazy but sweet.

Edit: In fact salaries used to be even more public, printed out and left in public for review.

⬐ danso

What is it now? I'm guessing it's not on the web, which would be vastly more public than in printed form?

⬐ reitanqild

Yep, but now whoever you check will receive a notice about who checked their salary.

So basically nobody does anymore which is a shame in some ways.

OTOH: Keeping everything wide open with no audit in the time of Internet and free access for East European criminals maybe wasn't the right way either. (E.g. you could plan a raid on rich old people based on electronically searchable archives.)

⬐ danso

Ha. That just reminded me of how I'm on a Texas gov page titled "Sex Offender Registry Export" because I once requested their sex offender database for academic research: https://records.txdps.state.tx.us/SexOffender/PublicSite/App...

I don't mind since my name is so common, but I emailed the Texas agency that they should put a noindex tag to prevent the page from being used against people with less common names (you can register for the registry via what appears to be a system lacking verification).