4 ms·

"How to take money from society whose elected representative set up a specific program to hand out" Which I also refuse to take, myself, but for different reas

• mschuster91 4y ago
  Intent matters. Opportunity Zones are set up to incentivize actual businesses providing services to the local community, not to serve as vehicles for far-away rich arseholes to cheat money out of the taxman.
  • mcv 4y ago
    But if the rules don't enforce that, and allow far-away rich arseholes to use these zones to cheat money out of the taxman, then that's sloppy legislating. The loopholes need to be closed. Relying on the goodwill of people whose primary unifying characteristic is the hoarding of extreme amounts of money is a bad idea.
    • mschuster91 4y ago
      The problem is a fundamental disadvantage in available manpower. Billionaires employ literal armies worth of extremely well paid lawyers, accountants and other professionals continuously working on finding and exploiting loopholes involving multiple jurisdictions, whereas most of the public services sector is barely keeping up. (Yes I'm aware that especially at the federal scale, the ultra rich sometimes outright buy special tax breaks, but that's not the case we're talking about) The solution would be to allow punishing breaking the intent of a law, but given how politicized even the justice system is these days, I'm not so sure if that's a good idea either.
      • lukas099 4y ago
        The solution is tax reform. Make taxes and social programs broad and simple.
      • sokoloff 4y ago
        If you could specify the intent in a way that could be adjudicated, why couldn’t you just write the law better in a different dimension? “This applies only up to $X M/yr” or whatever. Having someone later come along and try to devine what the “true intent” was and levy punishments for behavior clearly allowed by the law but against an imputed intent sounds worse for society based on laws than the avoidance of some taxes via a poorly written law.
    • ericmay 4y ago
      I agree and disagree. I agree that it’s sloppy legislation and to that end the group to blame is the government (and ultimately the people). But I disagree that if the rules don’t get enforced that it’s seemingly “ok” for people to exploit it. They should have common decency and ethical guidelines here. Probably why I’m not one of them.
      • mcv 4y ago
        I didn't say it was ok to exploit it. I say it's unavoidable that people will exploit it. I do wish we could run society purely on goodwill and people's intrinsic morality, but we've got a society that pushes people to crave more and more wealth, and those two don't go together.
        • ericmay 4y ago
          I apologize. The reading I had was you were kind of nonchalant about it in an almost accepting way. Though, I'd say there are many who would say it's ok "because you can", and I think they're irresponsible and disrespectful of themselves and their fellow humans.
          • mcv 4y ago
            I certainly don't think 'legal' necessarily implies 'moral'. Sometimes they're the exact opposite. There are also things that aren't legislated that should still guide us. For example, it's not illegal to be an asshole to someone. But that doesn't make it okay either. It's not something that's ever going to be legislated, and I don't think it should be. Tax rules, on the other hand, should be legislated, because the same people will always take advantage of them if they can. I don't see purely voluntary tax as working (though a certain type of libertarian loves to suggest exactly that).
        • more_corn 4y ago
          Maybe every society everywhere. The fact is that wealth and power protect themselves and always have. While crafting a fair society we must recognize this and deliberately skew the rules to favor those without wealth and power. In the US we mean we’ll but have utterly failed to do so. Our legal system is a prime example. The fact that we more often tax minimum wage workers than billionaires is another. Our society is shamefully unfair. But I actually think opportunity zones are a step in the right direction.
    • more_corn 4y ago
      “This rule sucks because someone might cheat and not follow this rule.” No people who cheat suck. The rule of followed actually brings a lot of investment and improvement to areas that need it.
  • more_corn 4y ago
    But the rules require that work be done in the area, that property be improved, that gains be reinvested in the area. Rich arseholes who never set foot in the area can still pour buckets of cash into areas WE DECIDED need it most.