4 ms·

Note: not an official website of the Sander's campaign. Also, let's keep it apolitical? What's interesting to me is that there's not yet a product-comparison-l

by keehun 11y ago

Note: not an official website of the Sander's campaign. Also, let's keep it apolitical? What's interesting to me is that there's not yet a product-comparison-like table where you enter your income and relevant financial information (stocks, etc) and it would tell you how this candidate's tax idea would affect you. This calculator for Sander's idea is amazing, and I hope to see more of these for other candidates!

sliverstorm 11y ago
On the one hand, proof that a candidate's tax idea won't affect you might forestall FUD. On the other hand, I am absolutely disgusted by evaluating policy changes based solely on the impact to one's own pocket book.
- pc86 11y ago
  The Adam Smith argument is that everyone should advocate for what is in their own best interest. Personally between this calculator and the more in-depth calculator it links to, I'm not going to vote for any candidate that promise to cause me to lose ~$300/mo in disposable income.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > The Adam Smith argument is that everyone should advocate for what is in their own best interest. The actual Adam Smith argument (that is, the one actually found in the Wealth of Nations [0]) is that different classes of people whose interests are more or less aligned with the public interest on matters of public affairs -- the former including both the landed aristocracy and wage laborers (though, in the latter case, he describes that class as being incapable of understanding their interest despite the fact that it is aligned with the common interest), the latter consisting of the capitalist class (though, not anticipating a term that would be coined around a century later than he wrote, he calls them "those who live by profit".) And that the last group is to be especially distrusted as their recommendations will consistently advance their own interest at the expense of the public interest. Smith was advocating that people be aware of the fact that people tend to advocate in their own narrow self-interest in public affairs as a safeguard against the threat he saw from certain powerful groups doing that (and, particularly, the danger he saw from business proprietors -- who were both aware of their interests and had interests opposed to the general interests -- manipulating wage-earners -- who he saw as having interests aligned with the common interest but being ill-equipped to recognize either their own interests or the public interest or to advocate for either -- into supporting the interests of the owners.) [0] Book I, Chapter XI, Part III, Conclusion of the Chapter
notahacker 11y ago
It'd also be useful to see comparisons between what they promised and what they actually delivered (particularly relevant for jurisdictions like the UK where lack of bipartisan agreement is rarely ever a factor in whether campaign promises get implemented)
pc86 11y ago
> Also, let's keep it apolitical? Uh, it's a tax calculator from a presidential candidate. How on Earth can you discuss that apolitically?
- serf 11y ago
  >Uh, it's a tax calculator from a presidential candidate. How on Earth can you discuss that apolitically? with HN classics like 'needs a drop shadow', 'hijacks my back button', or 'UGH (saas name here) IN 2016? SHEESH.'

by keehun 11y ago

sliverstorm 11y ago

On the one hand, proof that a candidate's tax idea won't affect you might forestall FUD. On the other hand, I am absolutely disgusted by evaluating policy changes based solely on the impact to one's own pocket book.

pc86 11y ago
The Adam Smith argument is that everyone should advocate for what is in their own best interest. Personally between this calculator and the more in-depth calculator it links to, I'm not going to vote for any candidate that promise to cause me to lose ~$300/mo in disposable income.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > The Adam Smith argument is that everyone should advocate for what is in their own best interest. The actual Adam Smith argument (that is, the one actually found in the Wealth of Nations [0]) is that different classes of people whose interests are more or less aligned with the public interest on matters of public affairs -- the former including both the landed aristocracy and wage laborers (though, in the latter case, he describes that class as being incapable of understanding their interest despite the fact that it is aligned with the common interest), the latter consisting of the capitalist class (though, not anticipating a term that would be coined around a century later than he wrote, he calls them "those who live by profit".) And that the last group is to be especially distrusted as their recommendations will consistently advance their own interest at the expense of the public interest. Smith was advocating that people be aware of the fact that people tend to advocate in their own narrow self-interest in public affairs as a safeguard against the threat he saw from certain powerful groups doing that (and, particularly, the danger he saw from business proprietors -- who were both aware of their interests and had interests opposed to the general interests -- manipulating wage-earners -- who he saw as having interests aligned with the common interest but being ill-equipped to recognize either their own interests or the public interest or to advocate for either -- into supporting the interests of the owners.) [0] Book I, Chapter XI, Part III, Conclusion of the Chapter

notahacker 11y ago

It'd also be useful to see comparisons between what they promised and what they actually delivered (particularly relevant for jurisdictions like the UK where lack of bipartisan agreement is rarely ever a factor in whether campaign promises get implemented)

pc86 11y ago

> Also, let's keep it apolitical? Uh, it's a tax calculator from a presidential candidate. How on Earth can you discuss that apolitically?

serf 11y ago
>Uh, it's a tax calculator from a presidential candidate. How on Earth can you discuss that apolitically? with HN classics like 'needs a drop shadow', 'hijacks my back button', or 'UGH (saas name here) IN 2016? SHEESH.'