4 ms·

You still didn't present any arguments why you need to know specifically my income and not just aggregated data (that can be arbitrary fine-grained like per-com

You still didn't present any arguments why you need to know specifically my income and not just aggregated data (that can be arbitrary fine-grained like per-company or even per-grade per-company), which makes it very hard for me not to consider whole discussion to be primary ideologically-motivated from your side. BTW I assume we are both not from US, so I don't understand why you are acting offended after being called leftist as a reply to explicitly leftist statement ("exposing inequality in society in undeniable fashion...").

igorkraw 5y ago
I'm open to doing those arbitrarily fine grained stats as a workable compromise, but the ability to have journalists or citizens check for inconsistencies in tax reports or use the raw data for other research seems positive for me, as well as the ability to ask my boss why I'm being paid less than my coworker who does less than me. You might disagree whether it's worth it, but they are 2 positives already (maybe 1 if you are hard against citizen law enforcement) The second part: it's boring because we can have a discussion about which mechanisms are beneficial for society without defaulting to political shortcuts or assuming an argument can only come from a worldview (maybe I'm a weird type of market libertarian who believes in perfect information symmetry?). You can argue that exposing inequalities doesn't have inherent value because inequalities are good actually Yadda Yadda Yadda and we can actually exchange our views on how and why we disagree...or you can default to the label. Yes we'd be rehashing a bunch, but it would be a good faith discussion. Edit:@Caskstrength, I can't reply to you, but I would like to highlight my first sentence in the first paragraph. Otherwise, thanks for engaging
- caskstrength 5y ago
  > the ability to have journalists or citizens check for inconsistencies in tax reports Journalists verifying tax reports of politicians seems reasonable. Jealous neighbor or vengeful ex snitching to IRS to audit me (random Joe-the-programmer)? Hell no. > use the raw data for other research seems positive for me Why does raw data for research needs to have PII? > ability to ask my boss why I'm being paid less than my coworker who does less than me No need to ask your boss, I can tell you straight up: Because you didn't negotiate for it. > You can argue that exposing inequalities doesn't have inherent value because inequalities are good actually Yadda Yadda Yadda No, I'm arguing that if you want to expose that those damn bourgeois make too much money for too little work, then you don't really need anything more than aggregate data, but you keep ignoring it.

igorkraw 5y ago

I'm open to doing those arbitrarily fine grained stats as a workable compromise, but the ability to have journalists or citizens check for inconsistencies in tax reports or use the raw data for other research seems positive for me, as well as the ability to ask my boss why I'm being paid less than my coworker who does less than me. You might disagree whether it's worth it, but they are 2 positives already (maybe 1 if you are hard against citizen law enforcement) The second part: it's boring because we can have a discussion about which mechanisms are beneficial for society without defaulting to political shortcuts or assuming an argument can only come from a worldview (maybe I'm a weird type of market libertarian who believes in perfect information symmetry?). You can argue that exposing inequalities doesn't have inherent value because inequalities are good actually Yadda Yadda Yadda and we can actually exchange our views on how and why we disagree...or you can default to the label. Yes we'd be rehashing a bunch, but it would be a good faith discussion. Edit:@Caskstrength, I can't reply to you, but I would like to highlight my first sentence in the first paragraph. Otherwise, thanks for engaging

caskstrength 5y ago
> the ability to have journalists or citizens check for inconsistencies in tax reports Journalists verifying tax reports of politicians seems reasonable. Jealous neighbor or vengeful ex snitching to IRS to audit me (random Joe-the-programmer)? Hell no. > use the raw data for other research seems positive for me Why does raw data for research needs to have PII? > ability to ask my boss why I'm being paid less than my coworker who does less than me No need to ask your boss, I can tell you straight up: Because you didn't negotiate for it. > You can argue that exposing inequalities doesn't have inherent value because inequalities are good actually Yadda Yadda Yadda No, I'm arguing that if you want to expose that those damn bourgeois make too much money for too little work, then you don't really need anything more than aggregate data, but you keep ignoring it.