4 ms·

We can argue rules, technicalities and definitions, but here's the overriding one: Everyone needs to pull their weight, pay their share. Nobody is more importan

We can argue rules, technicalities and definitions, but here's the overriding one: Everyone needs to pull their weight, pay their share. Nobody is more important than anyone else. Pulling your weight means equal sacrifice. It might be hard to calculate the equal sacrifice of someone making $20,000 and someone making $20,000,000, but I can tell you that $1,000 (EDIT: or 20% of income) is a heck of a lot more sacrifice for the former than the latter. I'm sick of people complaining about pulling their weight or saying they are too important to do so. Should taxes (and other laws) now be contingent on the government's judgment of your importance? I suppose the unimportant poor should cover the share of these extra-important wealthy. Personally, I'm kind of proud to pay my taxes and contribute to the enterprise of my democracy.

Swizec 8y ago
> I'm sick of people complaining about pulling their weight or saying they are too important to do so The people complaining the most are those too well off for assistance and too poor to bear their responsibility comfortably. That portion of the population where it feels like you can pay health care/insurance/taxes or afford to go out to dinner one night a month instead of cooking. It’s not a fun place to be. I grew up like that. There was a lot of talk about assholes in power stealing from us to give to the lazy bums on welfare.
- forapurpose 8y ago
  I've heard that. In your experience, does that match the hypothesis that it's just a tactic of the right to divide voters - turn the working class against each other (on racial and rural-urban lines too)?
  - Swizec 8y ago
    I think “the right” flames it up, but my family was very liberal, even socialist, yet still felt this way. When the taxman takes so much it feels he’s stealing from your children’s mouths you’re gonna complain. Fundamentally people in this situation, in my experience, don’t really care who is in power because they see them all as the same sort of enemy: the rich and powerful oppressing the working poor and pandering to the destitude so they look good and charitable on paper. This is hard to imagine if you’ve never been in a situation where a 5% discount on a gallon of milk is incentive enough to go to a different supermarket for this week’s grocery run.
    - noobermin 8y ago
      There is a bit of human nature in there perhaps, but from the beginning, subdivision into groups has always been a means for the wealthy to maintain their power. Here is exhibit A[0]. That it persisted to the point it became culture is one thing, but from its inception, subdividing the working class into groups (one of them being black and white) has been a means for the elite to maintain control. The KKK also had a similar start, being funded in part by former wealthy plantation owners fearful of white and former slave alliances during reconstruction. The subdivisions into class (middle class vs. working poor) is very similar. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacon%27s_Rebellion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacon%27s_Rebellion
tomcam 8y ago
> Pulling your weight means equal sacrifice I assume that means you feel we should all pay income tax at the same percentage. I agree with you completely.
- dlp211 8y ago
  This completely ignores the marginal rate of utity of a dollar and is a regressive and disastrous policy.
hippich 8y ago
One potential problem I see with it - when welfare, public infrastructure, country protection and other goods for all commons is outsourced to one ambiguous entity (federal government) people who paid for it the most are not getting respect for that, and instead are being called thieves and abusers of the system and that they should give more. While praise (if any) goes towards that ambiguous system. When a large donor donates to some cause - they get their name out there. When someone pays a lot of money into federal treasury - nil. It can be very discouraging and further isolating from people actually receiving a direct benefit (even if in the grand scheme of things everyone gets better off, including these large taxpayers.) Not saying there is a solution to that in modern states to that, but I can see how paying taxes to ambiguous treasury not very fulfilling, and when one actually cannot feel how they helped someone with it. I have similar feelings when contributing to a large code base. Yeah, we get top management's praise one a quarter/year about how good we did as a mass, but I do not feel that. Perhaps if I could see how the code I contributed somehow actually helped someone - I would feel better. But I could not come up with some solution to that. This I would imagine applies to many large systems. This includes so often discussed BS jobs, which most likely are not, they are just perceived this way because one who did it has no clue what effect their work had. And unless you are "superstar coder", "industry disrupter", etc - no one even remembers your name...
- forapurpose 8y ago
  > people who paid for it the most If we are talking about equal sacrifice, they did not pay the most, they paid as much as anyone else. > hen someone pays a lot of money into federal treasury - nil Why should they get any praise for doing their share? Or everyone should get praise (which I support). The premise that someone is somehow superior for doing their fair share is fallacious. They are not aristocrats condescending to help the poor; they are merely pulling their weight. > are being called thieves and abusers of the system and that they should give more. This is a strawman often used by advocates of low tax on the wealthy to, in a standard rhetorical technique, somehow portray themselves as victims - which is quite an incredible, cynical, and frankly embarrassing stretch. In fact, consensus has supported decreasing taxes for the wealthy, which is what has happened. Also, even those who oppose it, calling names is rare, IME. I'm sure there are some out there, but given that it's just a portion of one side of the debate, it's not many. If anyone on HN is using those words, I don't recall it. > While praise (if any) goes towards that ambiguous system. I'm not sure what's ambiguous about it at all.

Swizec 8y ago

> I'm sick of people complaining about pulling their weight or saying they are too important to do so The people complaining the most are those too well off for assistance and too poor to bear their responsibility comfortably. That portion of the population where it feels like you can pay health care/insurance/taxes or afford to go out to dinner one night a month instead of cooking. It’s not a fun place to be. I grew up like that. There was a lot of talk about assholes in power stealing from us to give to the lazy bums on welfare.

forapurpose 8y ago
I've heard that. In your experience, does that match the hypothesis that it's just a tactic of the right to divide voters - turn the working class against each other (on racial and rural-urban lines too)?
- Swizec 8y ago
  I think “the right” flames it up, but my family was very liberal, even socialist, yet still felt this way. When the taxman takes so much it feels he’s stealing from your children’s mouths you’re gonna complain. Fundamentally people in this situation, in my experience, don’t really care who is in power because they see them all as the same sort of enemy: the rich and powerful oppressing the working poor and pandering to the destitude so they look good and charitable on paper. This is hard to imagine if you’ve never been in a situation where a 5% discount on a gallon of milk is incentive enough to go to a different supermarket for this week’s grocery run.
  - noobermin 8y ago
    There is a bit of human nature in there perhaps, but from the beginning, subdivision into groups has always been a means for the wealthy to maintain their power. Here is exhibit A[0]. That it persisted to the point it became culture is one thing, but from its inception, subdividing the working class into groups (one of them being black and white) has been a means for the elite to maintain control. The KKK also had a similar start, being funded in part by former wealthy plantation owners fearful of white and former slave alliances during reconstruction. The subdivisions into class (middle class vs. working poor) is very similar. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacon%27s_Rebellion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacon%27s_Rebellion

tomcam 8y ago

> Pulling your weight means equal sacrifice I assume that means you feel we should all pay income tax at the same percentage. I agree with you completely.

dlp211 8y ago
This completely ignores the marginal rate of utity of a dollar and is a regressive and disastrous policy.

hippich 8y ago

One potential problem I see with it - when welfare, public infrastructure, country protection and other goods for all commons is outsourced to one ambiguous entity (federal government) people who paid for it the most are not getting respect for that, and instead are being called thieves and abusers of the system and that they should give more. While praise (if any) goes towards that ambiguous system. When a large donor donates to some cause - they get their name out there. When someone pays a lot of money into federal treasury - nil. It can be very discouraging and further isolating from people actually receiving a direct benefit (even if in the grand scheme of things everyone gets better off, including these large taxpayers.) Not saying there is a solution to that in modern states to that, but I can see how paying taxes to ambiguous treasury not very fulfilling, and when one actually cannot feel how they helped someone with it. I have similar feelings when contributing to a large code base. Yeah, we get top management's praise one a quarter/year about how good we did as a mass, but I do not feel that. Perhaps if I could see how the code I contributed somehow actually helped someone - I would feel better. But I could not come up with some solution to that. This I would imagine applies to many large systems. This includes so often discussed BS jobs, which most likely are not, they are just perceived this way because one who did it has no clue what effect their work had. And unless you are "superstar coder", "industry disrupter", etc - no one even remembers your name...

forapurpose 8y ago
> people who paid for it the most If we are talking about equal sacrifice, they did not pay the most, they paid as much as anyone else. > hen someone pays a lot of money into federal treasury - nil Why should they get any praise for doing their share? Or everyone should get praise (which I support). The premise that someone is somehow superior for doing their fair share is fallacious. They are not aristocrats condescending to help the poor; they are merely pulling their weight. > are being called thieves and abusers of the system and that they should give more. This is a strawman often used by advocates of low tax on the wealthy to, in a standard rhetorical technique, somehow portray themselves as victims - which is quite an incredible, cynical, and frankly embarrassing stretch. In fact, consensus has supported decreasing taxes for the wealthy, which is what has happened. Also, even those who oppose it, calling names is rare, IME. I'm sure there are some out there, but given that it's just a portion of one side of the debate, it's not many. If anyone on HN is using those words, I don't recall it. > While praise (if any) goes towards that ambiguous system. I'm not sure what's ambiguous about it at all.