4 ms·

Is it better to have companies pay taxes that can go toward programs like this OR have them "give" money to help form/direct programs like the example here? I

Is it better to have companies pay taxes that can go toward programs like this OR have them "give" money to help form/direct programs like the example here? I guess they could do both, but what should the standard be?

austhrow743 7y ago
If this is a government created and continuously maintained issue then it would seem that they should be as far away from any relief effort as possible. They don't want affordable housing. If they do start wanting it then relief funding won't be necessary.
munificent 7y ago
It's better to have them pay taxes. Taxes and their distribution are controlled by elected representatives who are ultimately beholden to democratic voters. Companies and philanthropists are beholden to nothing but their personal whims.
- DSingularity 7y ago
  While I hate how subversive tech has gotten — I don’t know if I agree. You are ignoring key factors: incompetence and corruption. I would bet that Apples plan is better than whatever plan some local/state politicians will put together. In fact maybe the CA laws should simply compel companies to offset the negative impact of their employees on the surrounding housing market.
  - akiselev 7y ago
    Who gets to decide what constitutes incompetence and corruption? Billionaires and controlling shareholders? The purpose of democracy is to place that decision squarely in the hands of the populace, as imperfect as that process is.
    - rayiner 7y ago
      > Who gets to decide what constitutes incompetence and corruption? Can we at least have Swedes decide “what constitutes incompetence and corruption?” Like democracy, except only Swedes in Sweden get to vote in US local elections. Once a year, a committee of Swedes will have to come over here and ride BART/the NYC Subway/Metro and report back before voting.
  - bobthepanda 7y ago
    Big tech companies are prone to making mistakes as well, but the difference is that as a general voter the disaster of the Amazon Fire phone or forcing a U2 album download to every iTunes account doesn't generally have impacts on my everyday life if I choose to not participate. This sounds like a great way of only diverting resources to those who already have it, and also of creating company towns that have historically been bad for workers.
  - ViViDboarder 7y ago
    Why would Apple or any other tech company know better than professionals? Do you think the government officials would create better iPhones?
- rayiner 7y ago
  That’s a bit idealistic. When I’m sitting on a DC Metro train jerking into the station because the infrastructure deteriorated so badly they had to turn off the automatic train control, I’m not thinking “this is the result of Democratic will.”
  - munificent 7y ago
    I don't know if I'd describe any choice between two non-perfect alternatives as "idealistic". The question was "which is better", not "which is great"? Government suffers from bureaucratic overhead and tyranny of the masses. But most of the other things it suffers from — control by special interests, regulatory capture, buying elections and politicians, are caused by billionaires and rich corporations. At least going through taxes and government has some amount of public influence instead of just abdicating the whole thing and submitting to becoming an complete oligogarchy.
    - rayiner 7y ago
      > But most of the other things it suffers from — control by special interests, regulatory capture, buying elections and politicians, are caused by billionaires and rich corporations. Billionaires and rich corporations caused WMATA and MTA to completely neglect maintenance for decades and let their systems literally catch on fire (despite being just as well funded as European systems?) Billionaires and rich corporations cause our education system to underperform (while being among the most well funded?) Billionaires and corporations cause our intractable housing issues? I just don’t buy this. European countries have billionaires and big corporations, regulatory systems that can be captured, etc. In fact they’re often the ones more overtly pushing pro-corporate policies. (Trump’s corporate tax cuts, for example, came long after similar cuts in Sweden, France, Ireland, and the U.K. Trump is fighting to cut the capital gains tax, for example, while many OECD countries don’t even have one.) Yet their trains somehow run on time, their schools are good, their crime rates are low, and their cities are generally nice and orderly.
solidsnack9000 7y ago
It’s a public policy issue. It’s not a matter of companies giving or not. The housing crisis not only can be solved without corporate giving or taxation, it has to be — we can’t keep feeding the rentier beast.

austhrow743 7y ago

If this is a government created and continuously maintained issue then it would seem that they should be as far away from any relief effort as possible. They don't want affordable housing. If they do start wanting it then relief funding won't be necessary.

munificent 7y ago

It's better to have them pay taxes. Taxes and their distribution are controlled by elected representatives who are ultimately beholden to democratic voters. Companies and philanthropists are beholden to nothing but their personal whims.

DSingularity 7y ago
While I hate how subversive tech has gotten — I don’t know if I agree. You are ignoring key factors: incompetence and corruption. I would bet that Apples plan is better than whatever plan some local/state politicians will put together. In fact maybe the CA laws should simply compel companies to offset the negative impact of their employees on the surrounding housing market.
- akiselev 7y ago
  Who gets to decide what constitutes incompetence and corruption? Billionaires and controlling shareholders? The purpose of democracy is to place that decision squarely in the hands of the populace, as imperfect as that process is.
  - rayiner 7y ago
    > Who gets to decide what constitutes incompetence and corruption? Can we at least have Swedes decide “what constitutes incompetence and corruption?” Like democracy, except only Swedes in Sweden get to vote in US local elections. Once a year, a committee of Swedes will have to come over here and ride BART/the NYC Subway/Metro and report back before voting.
- bobthepanda 7y ago
  Big tech companies are prone to making mistakes as well, but the difference is that as a general voter the disaster of the Amazon Fire phone or forcing a U2 album download to every iTunes account doesn't generally have impacts on my everyday life if I choose to not participate. This sounds like a great way of only diverting resources to those who already have it, and also of creating company towns that have historically been bad for workers.
- ViViDboarder 7y ago
  Why would Apple or any other tech company know better than professionals? Do you think the government officials would create better iPhones?
rayiner 7y ago
That’s a bit idealistic. When I’m sitting on a DC Metro train jerking into the station because the infrastructure deteriorated so badly they had to turn off the automatic train control, I’m not thinking “this is the result of Democratic will.”
- munificent 7y ago
  I don't know if I'd describe any choice between two non-perfect alternatives as "idealistic". The question was "which is better", not "which is great"? Government suffers from bureaucratic overhead and tyranny of the masses. But most of the other things it suffers from — control by special interests, regulatory capture, buying elections and politicians, are caused by billionaires and rich corporations. At least going through taxes and government has some amount of public influence instead of just abdicating the whole thing and submitting to becoming an complete oligogarchy.
  - rayiner 7y ago
    > But most of the other things it suffers from — control by special interests, regulatory capture, buying elections and politicians, are caused by billionaires and rich corporations. Billionaires and rich corporations caused WMATA and MTA to completely neglect maintenance for decades and let their systems literally catch on fire (despite being just as well funded as European systems?) Billionaires and rich corporations cause our education system to underperform (while being among the most well funded?) Billionaires and corporations cause our intractable housing issues? I just don’t buy this. European countries have billionaires and big corporations, regulatory systems that can be captured, etc. In fact they’re often the ones more overtly pushing pro-corporate policies. (Trump’s corporate tax cuts, for example, came long after similar cuts in Sweden, France, Ireland, and the U.K. Trump is fighting to cut the capital gains tax, for example, while many OECD countries don’t even have one.) Yet their trains somehow run on time, their schools are good, their crime rates are low, and their cities are generally nice and orderly.

solidsnack9000 7y ago

It’s a public policy issue. It’s not a matter of companies giving or not. The housing crisis not only can be solved without corporate giving or taxation, it has to be — we can’t keep feeding the rentier beast.