4 ms·

You're mixing up a bunch of different issues. I'm not saying it is irrational for the author to advocate raising taxes for everyone, including themselves. I'm

You're mixing up a bunch of different issues. I'm not saying it is irrational for the author to advocate raising taxes for everyone, including themselves. I'm saying that if the author really thought donating that extra $X to the government (when other people do) was such a good idea, they would be donating it right now even if other people don't. The reason is that the marginal benefit to the government of the author handing them an extra $X when other people do the same is no higher than when they don't. Unless, of course, the author plans to dodge the tax themselves once taxes are raised for everyone. The prisoner's dilemma is not a valid comparison because donating when the other person doesn't yields an equal or higher marginal return as donating when the other person does. In the prisoner's dilemma it's the other way around: cooperating when the other person defects results in a lower marginal return than when the other person cooperates.

skh 8y ago
I'm saying that if the author really thought donating that extra $X to the government (when other people do) was such a good idea, they would be donating it right now even if other people don't. This is an aspect of human behavior. Sometimes people won’t do something if they aren’t forced to even if they think its a good idea. This is why the free rider problem exists. Your conclusion ignores facts surrounding human psychology. People don’t see a $1,000 donation to the government as being helpful if it’s just them doing it. They can see it being beneficial if millions of people do it. Hence an individual is unlikely to make a voluntary donation to the government whilst supporting increased taxation for everyone in their income bracket.
- antidesitter 8y ago
  > Your conclusion ignores facts surrounding human psychology. Which conclusion? You basically said I'm correct.
  - skh 8y ago
    I quoted and if/then type statement you made. That statement’s conclusion does not follow from that statement’s premise. I clearly did not agree with that statement and gave reasons for why it is obviously false.
    - antidesitter 8y ago
      Are you referring to this one? > if the author really thought donating that extra $X to the government (when other people do) was such a good idea, they would be donating it right now Which part are you disputing? Your comments about human psychology merely support the fact that the author doesn't really think it's a good idea, and that there are psychological factors other than rationality and honesty at play.

skh 8y ago

I'm saying that if the author really thought donating that extra $X to the government (when other people do) was such a good idea, they would be donating it right now even if other people don't. This is an aspect of human behavior. Sometimes people won’t do something if they aren’t forced to even if they think its a good idea. This is why the free rider problem exists. Your conclusion ignores facts surrounding human psychology. People don’t see a $1,000 donation to the government as being helpful if it’s just them doing it. They can see it being beneficial if millions of people do it. Hence an individual is unlikely to make a voluntary donation to the government whilst supporting increased taxation for everyone in their income bracket.

antidesitter 8y ago
> Your conclusion ignores facts surrounding human psychology. Which conclusion? You basically said I'm correct.
- skh 8y ago
  I quoted and if/then type statement you made. That statement’s conclusion does not follow from that statement’s premise. I clearly did not agree with that statement and gave reasons for why it is obviously false.
  - antidesitter 8y ago
    Are you referring to this one? > if the author really thought donating that extra $X to the government (when other people do) was such a good idea, they would be donating it right now Which part are you disputing? Your comments about human psychology merely support the fact that the author doesn't really think it's a good idea, and that there are psychological factors other than rationality and honesty at play.