6 ms·

Per the story the Bloomberg administration paid for the work, a least in part, by significantly increasing water bills. It implies that's part of the reason De

Per the story the Bloomberg administration paid for the work, a least in part, by significantly increasing water bills. It implies that's part of the reason De Blasio cut back on it. It's a bit of tangent but that's a regressive tax: It puts a greater burden on the poor than on the wealthy: $10 from someone making $8/hour and risking having their water shut off is a much larger sacrifice for the public good than $10 from someone making six figures. The trendy idea that taxes in general and progressive (not in the political sense but in the technical sense) tax systems are somehow unfair is holding up important development in the U.S. There is a cost to failing to invest; we could never invest in anything and we'd be much poorer.

cubano 11y ago
> The trendy idea that taxes in general and progressive (not in the political sense but in the technical sense) tax systems are somehow unfair is holding up important development in the U.S. I would disagree. The opposing trendy idea is that the eventual output of the tax systems are so filled with waste, fraud, and abuse that simply pouring more and more money, no matter the source, into politically-connected blackhole businesses contracted to perform some government sponsored task rarely if ever works and needs to much more carefully managed. There are so many real-world examples of this (healthcare.gov comes instantly to mind, and the recent TSA app but there are many others) that I won't bother to list them. A much greater level of transparency for all these deals would go a long way in helping fix these sensible concerns. [edits]
- hackuser 11y ago
  > pouring more and more money, no matter the source, into politically-connected blackhole businesses contracted to perform some government sponsored task rarely if ever works 1) The evidence is very much to the contrary: Almost all infrastructure in the country was paid for by tax dollars and built on government contracts. The entire highway system, the military, most of the health system, almost all education including public universities, most scientific research, etc. WWII was won that way. What would the country look like if there was no public investment? It would be a poor, undeveloped nation. 2) What alternative is there? Not invest in anything until we live in a perfect world? Again, it would impoverish the country. Blocking investment is a very unwise method of saving money for any institution; imagine a business which refused to invest in anything - it would be insane. 3) I agree there is corruption, and I agree more transparency would help, but every human institution has corruption (go ahead, name a large one that doesn't). If we're going to live with humans, we have no choices other than to move forward as we are or retire to caves.
  - cubano 11y ago
    I am not against public investment. I am for using modern IT practices to add transparency and accountability to the process.
- mentalpiracy 11y ago
  This might be a trendy idea (and is not wrong, per se) but honestly the data simply does not back it up. The GAO estimates that waste, fraud and corruption amounted to approximately $126 billion in 2014.[1] Sure, that's a huge number, but realize that the entire government spend for 2014 was 3.77 trillion dollars.[2] This context is crucial - this "black hole" you are lending such argumentative weight to only amounts to a 3% loss. Even if we were to double the GAO's estimate to 6%, I'm not really convinced that really provides a rational basis for describing the output of tax systems as "so filled with waste, fraud and abuse". No reasonable person objects to combating waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is certainly not as widespread as some people might believe. [1] GAO-15-814, Federal Spending Accountability - http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/672473.pdf http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/672473.pdf [2] US Federal Budget 2014 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_United_States_federal_budget https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_United_States_federal_bud... edit: a word, "it is not wrong, per se"
  - cubano 11y ago
    I personally find it almost absurd to expect the very agencies that are nominally in control of Federal expenditures to reliably track and then expose their own waste, folly, and, yes, theft of taxpayer funds. Why do you think their is such huge support behind political establishment outsiders such as Sanders and Trump? Many people are simply exhausted by the lies and deceit that flows from elite Washington circles nowadays, and thinking that self-reported figures are going to placate them is wishful indeed.
    - mentalpiracy 11y ago
      I didn't downvote you, but I think you need to do some self-directed reading. The GAO is widely credited from all sides for its standout analysis and data gathering, independent of partisan affiliation or regulatory capture. Its methods are quite rigorous and indeed, if you read the report that I linked in my previous comment, you would see how some of the GAO's investigatory successes have come from comparing agency self-reports against independent audits. As I said before also, nobody disputes that waste and fraud are bad and should be stopped. But the problem is not nearly as widespread as generally believed - and that is the problem, because it elevates an minor issue to an outsized status at the expense of other, larger issues.
harryh 11y ago
De Blasio didn't reduce the price of water. So, to whatever extent that's a regressive tax, it didn't go away. He diverted the money elsewhere. This isn't really a story about taxes. It's a story about risk tolerance.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
keithpeter 11y ago
Would water and sewage services actually be cut off in the event of inability to pay? Seems like a potential health hazard for neighbours &c. UK: https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/water/water-supply/problems-with-paying-your-water-bill/if-you-don-t-pay-your-water-bill/ https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/water/water-suppl...
- hackuser 11y ago
  I've read many times about it happening in the U.S., but that's all I know.

cubano 11y ago

> The trendy idea that taxes in general and progressive (not in the political sense but in the technical sense) tax systems are somehow unfair is holding up important development in the U.S. I would disagree. The opposing trendy idea is that the eventual output of the tax systems are so filled with waste, fraud, and abuse that simply pouring more and more money, no matter the source, into politically-connected blackhole businesses contracted to perform some government sponsored task rarely if ever works and needs to much more carefully managed. There are so many real-world examples of this (healthcare.gov comes instantly to mind, and the recent TSA app but there are many others) that I won't bother to list them. A much greater level of transparency for all these deals would go a long way in helping fix these sensible concerns. [edits]

hackuser 11y ago
> pouring more and more money, no matter the source, into politically-connected blackhole businesses contracted to perform some government sponsored task rarely if ever works 1) The evidence is very much to the contrary: Almost all infrastructure in the country was paid for by tax dollars and built on government contracts. The entire highway system, the military, most of the health system, almost all education including public universities, most scientific research, etc. WWII was won that way. What would the country look like if there was no public investment? It would be a poor, undeveloped nation. 2) What alternative is there? Not invest in anything until we live in a perfect world? Again, it would impoverish the country. Blocking investment is a very unwise method of saving money for any institution; imagine a business which refused to invest in anything - it would be insane. 3) I agree there is corruption, and I agree more transparency would help, but every human institution has corruption (go ahead, name a large one that doesn't). If we're going to live with humans, we have no choices other than to move forward as we are or retire to caves.
- cubano 11y ago
  I am not against public investment. I am for using modern IT practices to add transparency and accountability to the process.
mentalpiracy 11y ago
This might be a trendy idea (and is not wrong, per se) but honestly the data simply does not back it up. The GAO estimates that waste, fraud and corruption amounted to approximately $126 billion in 2014.[1] Sure, that's a huge number, but realize that the entire government spend for 2014 was 3.77 trillion dollars.[2] This context is crucial - this "black hole" you are lending such argumentative weight to only amounts to a 3% loss. Even if we were to double the GAO's estimate to 6%, I'm not really convinced that really provides a rational basis for describing the output of tax systems as "so filled with waste, fraud and abuse". No reasonable person objects to combating waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is certainly not as widespread as some people might believe. [1] GAO-15-814, Federal Spending Accountability - http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/672473.pdf http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/672473.pdf [2] US Federal Budget 2014 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_United_States_federal_budget https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_United_States_federal_bud... edit: a word, "it is not wrong, per se"
- cubano 11y ago
  I personally find it almost absurd to expect the very agencies that are nominally in control of Federal expenditures to reliably track and then expose their own waste, folly, and, yes, theft of taxpayer funds. Why do you think their is such huge support behind political establishment outsiders such as Sanders and Trump? Many people are simply exhausted by the lies and deceit that flows from elite Washington circles nowadays, and thinking that self-reported figures are going to placate them is wishful indeed.
  - mentalpiracy 11y ago
    I didn't downvote you, but I think you need to do some self-directed reading. The GAO is widely credited from all sides for its standout analysis and data gathering, independent of partisan affiliation or regulatory capture. Its methods are quite rigorous and indeed, if you read the report that I linked in my previous comment, you would see how some of the GAO's investigatory successes have come from comparing agency self-reports against independent audits. As I said before also, nobody disputes that waste and fraud are bad and should be stopped. But the problem is not nearly as widespread as generally believed - and that is the problem, because it elevates an minor issue to an outsized status at the expense of other, larger issues.

harryh 11y ago

De Blasio didn't reduce the price of water. So, to whatever extent that's a regressive tax, it didn't go away. He diverted the money elsewhere. This isn't really a story about taxes. It's a story about risk tolerance.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

keithpeter 11y ago

Would water and sewage services actually be cut off in the event of inability to pay? Seems like a potential health hazard for neighbours &c. UK: https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/water/water-supply/problems-with-paying-your-water-bill/if-you-don-t-pay-your-water-bill/ https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/water/water-suppl...

hackuser 11y ago
I've read many times about it happening in the U.S., but that's all I know.