3 ms·

It's explicitly designed and funded to be as such. The ENTIRE REST OF THE WORLD does these things, and here in the USA we claim the unique skill of an incompete

It's explicitly designed and funded to be as such. The ENTIRE REST OF THE WORLD does these things, and here in the USA we claim the unique skill of an incompetent government that we somehow hold up to the rest of the world as a beacon of freedom and democracy. Does not compute.

ultrarunner 7y ago
I think the various indices of freedom (press freedom, human rights, etc) show convincingly that the U.S. is not a beacon, in any sense, of freedom. That freedom seems to be a stated goal of the founders in forming their government the way they did seems to be a mark of incompetence even in that regard. My statement should not be construed to imply that Intuit handling it is morally superior (not only because of the incentive for corruption involved), even while the thought of using tax filing software written by government contractors makes me shudder.
- carlmr 7y ago
  It kind of depends on your definition of freedom. I'd say freedom of speech is stronger in the US than most of Europe. Europe has a lot of hate speech laws that limit freedom of speech more than in the US. Whether that's good or bad is subjective. Freedom to own guns without many restrictions or permits is probably unique to the US. Freedom to not have health insurance (mind you I prefer not having to worry about crushing medical debt in Germany, but it is a kind of freedom). There's probably more than these 3,but for certain definitions of freedom the US is quite high. You could say that Germany for example has a very different view of freedom. The government mandates that you get at least 4 weeks vacation, that you are insured at least half way properly, that you pay a lot more taxes for public goods (trains, roads, television, food subsidies, ...). This restricts the freedom of employers, your freedom to do with your money what you want, etc. but in return you have more freedom from debt traps, you have free time to go on vacation, you can get around the country without a car, etc. So by limiting certain individual freedoms you can gain a different definition of freedom.
  - caseysoftware 7y ago
    The fundamental questions then become "do the freedoms you want match the ones they give?" and "are you willing to give up the freedoms required?" If you answer "yes" to both, then there's no issue and you're happy. If you answer "no" to either (or both), it doesn't matter. You're still stuck with them. Therefore, the real "freedom" you have is to agree with them. Everything else is decorative.
    - homonculus1 7y ago
      "You are free to do as we tell you!" --Bill Hicks

ultrarunner 7y ago

I think the various indices of freedom (press freedom, human rights, etc) show convincingly that the U.S. is not a beacon, in any sense, of freedom. That freedom seems to be a stated goal of the founders in forming their government the way they did seems to be a mark of incompetence even in that regard. My statement should not be construed to imply that Intuit handling it is morally superior (not only because of the incentive for corruption involved), even while the thought of using tax filing software written by government contractors makes me shudder.

carlmr 7y ago
It kind of depends on your definition of freedom. I'd say freedom of speech is stronger in the US than most of Europe. Europe has a lot of hate speech laws that limit freedom of speech more than in the US. Whether that's good or bad is subjective. Freedom to own guns without many restrictions or permits is probably unique to the US. Freedom to not have health insurance (mind you I prefer not having to worry about crushing medical debt in Germany, but it is a kind of freedom). There's probably more than these 3,but for certain definitions of freedom the US is quite high. You could say that Germany for example has a very different view of freedom. The government mandates that you get at least 4 weeks vacation, that you are insured at least half way properly, that you pay a lot more taxes for public goods (trains, roads, television, food subsidies, ...). This restricts the freedom of employers, your freedom to do with your money what you want, etc. but in return you have more freedom from debt traps, you have free time to go on vacation, you can get around the country without a car, etc. So by limiting certain individual freedoms you can gain a different definition of freedom.
- caseysoftware 7y ago
  The fundamental questions then become "do the freedoms you want match the ones they give?" and "are you willing to give up the freedoms required?" If you answer "yes" to both, then there's no issue and you're happy. If you answer "no" to either (or both), it doesn't matter. You're still stuck with them. Therefore, the real "freedom" you have is to agree with them. Everything else is decorative.
  - homonculus1 7y ago
    "You are free to do as we tell you!" --Bill Hicks