5 ms·

Why don't you make paying tax easier? It wouldn't work here. Why don't you reduce your carbon emissions? It wouldn't work here. Why don't you make healthcare af

Why don't you make paying tax easier? It wouldn't work here. Why don't you reduce your carbon emissions? It wouldn't work here. Why don't you make healthcare affordable? It wouldn't work here. Why don't you make it harder for psychologically disturbed adolescents to access semi-automatic weapons? It wouldn't work here. It's the same argument ad nauseum about every political issue since before the civil war. The US is unique, the US electorate have strong and immutable views, the US cannot learn from anyone else. Time and time again, educated people dismiss the possibility of change, dismiss the possibility of persuasion and compromise and reconciliation, dismiss the possibility of shifting the Overton window and changing the zeitgeist. That isn't common sense, it's political nihilism. The consequences of that nihilistic ideology are writ large on the American political landscape and they are proving to be disastrous.

tedunangst 8y ago
But it's impossible to move the Overton window because of the massive TurboTax bribes.
- rayiner 8y ago
  There's probably a dozen people on HN reading this thread right now who can throw more cash at politicians than Intuit spends on lobbying each year.
  - mixmastamyk 8y ago
    Cheaper to hire an accountant to deal.
  - PhasmaFelis 8y ago
    But they don't.
  - dredmorbius 8y ago
    https://www.worldcat.org/title/logic-of-collective-action-public-goods-and-the-theory-of-groups/oclc/980947758 https://www.worldcat.org/title/logic-of-collective-action-pu...
  - ineedasername 8y ago
    Except complex tax law benefits corporations as well, creating emergent properties that can be exploited. You'd have to outspend more than Intuit to change things.
rayiner 8y ago
Whether or not American culture can be changed is besides the point. My point is that the article misidentifies the reason we don't have automatic tax filing. It's not the $5 million in Intuit/H&R Block lobbying, which is not a large amount of money. Intuit/H&R Block are simply riding much more powerful political forces that exist for other reasons. (For the same reason, the $5 million in NRA lobbying each year is not why we don't pass laws limiting access to semi-automatic weapons for "disturbed adolescents." It's voters like me who are morally opposed to the government keeping a list of who can and cannot exercise their 2nd amendment rights. The lobbying is just so the NRA can remind politicians how many of us there are.)
- nielsbot 8y ago
  Sounds like you'd be surprised how cheaply politicians are bought. BTW--"sensible gun reform" has majority support.
  - rayiner 8y ago
    That’s a self-refuting assertion. If lobbying works, why would it be so cheap? The economy has tons of competing interests—if they could get their way through lobbying, that should bid up the cost of “buying” politicians. For example, Grover Norquist has no personal stake in keeping tax filing complicated (he doesn’t own stock in Intuit or H&R Block as far as I know). But he spends a lot of time on the issue for ideological reasons. You’re telling me that there’s not a billionaire Democrat who could throw $5 million a year at the tax issue for funsies? Or public unions who would benefit from simpler tax filing allowing taxes to be raised more easily? If it was just a matter of outspending Intuit and H&R Block, someone would do it. But I could give you $10 million a year (double what the tax companies spend) for this issue, and you would not be able to lobby tax simplification into law.
    - moorhosj 8y ago
      Why would people spend money on something like this “for funsies”? You don’t even take your own idea seriously or provide a credible reason other than “why not”. Intuit and H&R Block have a specific goal and target it with specific dollars each year. Over time that builds influence and control. Grover Norquist absolutely has an interest in keeping taxes complex, it’s his entire basis for influence and power. His fight is about lowering taxes anyways, not complexity. Here’s the flip side to your stance. If lobbying has no influence, why do privately held businesses spend so much on it each year? Wouldn’t these rational actors stop wasting money if there was no ROI?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
ineedasername 8y ago
Very true, but it's not unique to the US. The UK re: Brexit us a great case in point

tedunangst 8y ago

But it's impossible to move the Overton window because of the massive TurboTax bribes.

rayiner 8y ago
There's probably a dozen people on HN reading this thread right now who can throw more cash at politicians than Intuit spends on lobbying each year.
- mixmastamyk 8y ago
  Cheaper to hire an accountant to deal.
- PhasmaFelis 8y ago
  But they don't.
- dredmorbius 8y ago
  https://www.worldcat.org/title/logic-of-collective-action-public-goods-and-the-theory-of-groups/oclc/980947758 https://www.worldcat.org/title/logic-of-collective-action-pu...
- ineedasername 8y ago
  Except complex tax law benefits corporations as well, creating emergent properties that can be exploited. You'd have to outspend more than Intuit to change things.

rayiner 8y ago

Whether or not American culture can be changed is besides the point. My point is that the article misidentifies the reason we don't have automatic tax filing. It's not the $5 million in Intuit/H&R Block lobbying, which is not a large amount of money. Intuit/H&R Block are simply riding much more powerful political forces that exist for other reasons. (For the same reason, the $5 million in NRA lobbying each year is not why we don't pass laws limiting access to semi-automatic weapons for "disturbed adolescents." It's voters like me who are morally opposed to the government keeping a list of who can and cannot exercise their 2nd amendment rights. The lobbying is just so the NRA can remind politicians how many of us there are.)

nielsbot 8y ago
Sounds like you'd be surprised how cheaply politicians are bought. BTW--"sensible gun reform" has majority support.
- rayiner 8y ago
  That’s a self-refuting assertion. If lobbying works, why would it be so cheap? The economy has tons of competing interests—if they could get their way through lobbying, that should bid up the cost of “buying” politicians. For example, Grover Norquist has no personal stake in keeping tax filing complicated (he doesn’t own stock in Intuit or H&R Block as far as I know). But he spends a lot of time on the issue for ideological reasons. You’re telling me that there’s not a billionaire Democrat who could throw $5 million a year at the tax issue for funsies? Or public unions who would benefit from simpler tax filing allowing taxes to be raised more easily? If it was just a matter of outspending Intuit and H&R Block, someone would do it. But I could give you $10 million a year (double what the tax companies spend) for this issue, and you would not be able to lobby tax simplification into law.
  - moorhosj 8y ago
    Why would people spend money on something like this “for funsies”? You don’t even take your own idea seriously or provide a credible reason other than “why not”. Intuit and H&R Block have a specific goal and target it with specific dollars each year. Over time that builds influence and control. Grover Norquist absolutely has an interest in keeping taxes complex, it’s his entire basis for influence and power. His fight is about lowering taxes anyways, not complexity. Here’s the flip side to your stance. If lobbying has no influence, why do privately held businesses spend so much on it each year? Wouldn’t these rational actors stop wasting money if there was no ROI?

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

ineedasername 8y ago

Very true, but it's not unique to the US. The UK re: Brexit us a great case in point