5 ms·

> It’s all good and fair, no? as good and fair as any bigger and more powerful forces coming at you and demanding a cut of whatever it is you do... lest you're

> It’s all good and fair, no? as good and fair as any bigger and more powerful forces coming at you and demanding a cut of whatever it is you do... lest you're breaking the law but this is very normalized, but ultimately is a legacy of imperialism and other kinds of centralizing powers: give your rulers some freebies or get harassed until you do an alternative perspective is that we all need to contribute some money (and/or energy) to the public systems which do things for "all of us" as the public at large when this is 'mandatory', like it is now (you can always not do it, but there will be consequences), we call it taxes and fees, to do this voluntarily is the now obsolete tithe (even the quantity matches 10%). the real problem I have with this setup is that money (but I actually mean currency) is made up and controlled by governments in collab with banking corporations; which means they have ways to use this system to move some of said "energy" from us to them; this leads me to conclude that then, regular taxes like VAT are double dipping on our energy as we 1: get taxed so to give money to the government/public entities and institutions; and 2: they make up currency and extract money/energy from all of us automatically (them theories about how money is debt, combined with QE and the new quantitative tightening, are all parts of how this whole hidden system works); arguably this way to take advantage of the currency/monetary system is only being used by private financiers (big banking) not governments which really do need the taxes to function at least for now but I already ranted too much

michaelmrose 3y ago
I presume you like roads, social security, a standing army, and a million other things. These things cost money and the logical way to raise that money is via taxes. Please don't post unreadable incomprehensible stream of consciousness here. Take a moment to refine the words running through your head into a coherent paragraph or two.
- jimkleiber 3y ago
  Personally I wish more people would post stream of consciousness writing, as I believe it often reveals the uncertainty and inner conflict that exists within our thoughts and feelings. What I gathered from what they posted was a conflict about realizing that governments need money but wishing they didn't force people to pay, but not sure if people would pay if it weren't forced, and trying to dance between those ideas. Some may not like stream of consciousness and some may, it's hard to know, and it may depend on our current situation and format of the post or culture of the place. Maybe HN has a culture to distill thoughts before posting, I dunno. I like more raw thoughts typically.
  - michaelmrose 3y ago
    Nobody on earth who has spent any amount of time thinking about it thinks society at scale would pay for common goods if it was optional. Part of actually distilling your thoughts into a useful form is realizing when to use the backspace key. There might be 1000 people reading this. We all have a stream of conscioisness. If we all shared it this thread would be unteadable with a few gems buried in dross. Distilling your thoughts down and sharing what is worthy is a universal good not merely a cultural value. It's why we are reading this and not YouTube or Facebook comment threads.
    - zlg_codes 3y ago
      To be frank, this place is a slightly nerdier Reddit with stronger topicality enforced, whose audience trends toward middle age, male, and moderate. It is not a shining city on a hill. I can find a lot of the same content on Lobste.rs later in the day, and get comments from an actually exclusive group. We're here because there is enough news to keep us visiting, and relaxed enough rules to feel comfortable challenging each other intellectually. Most of the Internet used to be this way, before social media.
    - jimkleiber 3y ago
      At times what I deem as worthy is a distilled version. At other times what I deem as worthy is a messier version. Distilled can help me read it quickly and give me certainty over someone's perspective. Messier can take longer to read and yet show me an often more accurate window into someone's mind, helping me feel more connected to the person. Again, if you're saying that you strongly believe HN is not the place for such windows into the inner workings of someone's mind and you believe HN should be the packaged output, I might agree. Most people who contribute here seem to obey that rule. Maybe if everyone posted stream of consciousness, this place would become untenable. However, if it goes from 1% to 3%, I think it'd still be manageable and then I could feel delighted at the interspersed nature of it. In other words, almost the opposite of the free rider problem you may have alluded to regarding public goods, or the similarity to it if you think those who provide distilled versions are doing more work for the common good and the others are doing less. In this scenario, I suppose it depends on what one defines as good in the common good.
- zlg_codes 3y ago
  Go look at America's budget and come back with that ignorance... The amount of money America spends on itself, its people, and its infrastructure, is embarrassing. Taxes are often lauded as a necessary evil, but it's generally not JUST the tax people have trouble with. It's how it's allocated. And we can cutely sidestep or handwave that as "a voting problem", but it's interconnected. I'd have no problem paying taxes to an entity who I could trust and know has my back, who invests in the infrastructure that makes life in this country better. But we cannot trust that entity, it never does what it says it should on paper. It sends money overseas for pet military projects. It doles out countless frivolous contracts to fulfill the gargantuan military budget. Collective pooling of resources only works when the spending of those resources is done for the benefit of everyone contributing. That currently does not happen. I like creature comforts like anyone else, but I'd rather live in a country that gives a shit about me and puts my tax dollars to good use, instead of feeling like livestock in a rat wheel whose contributions to the country will never bear into a tangible benefit.
  - voidwtf 3y ago
    Then let’s fight corruption, let’s fight to spend those budgets on educating our populace and having amazing public services. Let’s stop dithering about taxes and create a system of government that punishes corruption and is policed by a wholly different institution. It’s ridiculous to expect any institution that polices itself to not fall into corruption over time.
    - brigandish 3y ago
      The only way to fight corruption is to have a small enough government that it can be a) understood b) watched, and c) isn't too powerful. Much like the systems many on HN work with, if you can't keep a good chunk in your head at once and understand what it might be doing on the border with the bit you can't, then it's probably too big or you start having to give trust to others to understand it and handle it for you. If we want voters to be able to watch and meaningfully impact the government then it must be much, much smaller than any current developed nation's government is.
carlosjobim 3y ago
Can I challenge your view a bit? Yes, the rulers are double-dipping and even quadruple-dipping. But if you think about it, why are taxes so incredibly complicated, like there is not a single thing you can do that isn't taxed? That is because taxation is not the main act, it is only the supportive act. The main act is creating currency from nothing. That is how the rulers get their wealth and finance their government. If you're paying taxes through your nose and think I'm being ridiculous by saying it's only a supportive act, think about this: Why is it so important that you and everybody else pay taxes to the government on your income and everything else, when the government can just print as much money as they need? It is because the money would be worthless without the complicated taxation system. The money origins from the government (it says as much on the bills, even has a signature), and the only way to make anybody actually want that money is to force them to pay it to the government. So that's why there's so many and unavoidable taxes. If you work for a living you have to pay taxes in the government money - so naturally you'll want your wages in government money. If you make business, it's the same thing. And so on. Taxes is the only way that the government can create demand for their worthless money, so that's why you have them.
- konschubert 3y ago
  That sound very smart but I don't follow the logic. FIAT money is popular because it is popular, and because there is an entity, the central bank, which works towards its stability. FIAT money would still be popular even if you didn't have to pay taxes in it.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - carlosjobim 3y ago
    The logic is that fiat money continually loses value due to inflation, which means that most people want to avoid it if they had the option. The stability that the central bank guarantees is that the currency will continue decrease in value, until it becomes exponential and out of control. Then a currency reform is conducted. The central banks do not try to hide that their goal is inflation, although they aren't very honest about the rate of inflation. I'd say there would be no demand at all for government fiat currency, unless they forced people to use it. In ancient Rome the emperor just diluted the silver coins with other metals and tried to force people to accept it at face value. Then in much of history there was no fiat money to speak of, rulers demanded their tributes in gold or hard goods. But if you demand tributes (taxes) in a currency that only you emit, there will be a demand on that currency. In the real world, we see this in many countries in the world, where as the government does not tightly control the population and their tax payments, they are not able to protect the value of their currency, and their people will use foreign fiat currency as much as they can.

michaelmrose 3y ago

I presume you like roads, social security, a standing army, and a million other things. These things cost money and the logical way to raise that money is via taxes. Please don't post unreadable incomprehensible stream of consciousness here. Take a moment to refine the words running through your head into a coherent paragraph or two.

jimkleiber 3y ago
Personally I wish more people would post stream of consciousness writing, as I believe it often reveals the uncertainty and inner conflict that exists within our thoughts and feelings. What I gathered from what they posted was a conflict about realizing that governments need money but wishing they didn't force people to pay, but not sure if people would pay if it weren't forced, and trying to dance between those ideas. Some may not like stream of consciousness and some may, it's hard to know, and it may depend on our current situation and format of the post or culture of the place. Maybe HN has a culture to distill thoughts before posting, I dunno. I like more raw thoughts typically.
- michaelmrose 3y ago
  Nobody on earth who has spent any amount of time thinking about it thinks society at scale would pay for common goods if it was optional. Part of actually distilling your thoughts into a useful form is realizing when to use the backspace key. There might be 1000 people reading this. We all have a stream of conscioisness. If we all shared it this thread would be unteadable with a few gems buried in dross. Distilling your thoughts down and sharing what is worthy is a universal good not merely a cultural value. It's why we are reading this and not YouTube or Facebook comment threads.
  - zlg_codes 3y ago
    To be frank, this place is a slightly nerdier Reddit with stronger topicality enforced, whose audience trends toward middle age, male, and moderate. It is not a shining city on a hill. I can find a lot of the same content on Lobste.rs later in the day, and get comments from an actually exclusive group. We're here because there is enough news to keep us visiting, and relaxed enough rules to feel comfortable challenging each other intellectually. Most of the Internet used to be this way, before social media.
  - jimkleiber 3y ago
    At times what I deem as worthy is a distilled version. At other times what I deem as worthy is a messier version. Distilled can help me read it quickly and give me certainty over someone's perspective. Messier can take longer to read and yet show me an often more accurate window into someone's mind, helping me feel more connected to the person. Again, if you're saying that you strongly believe HN is not the place for such windows into the inner workings of someone's mind and you believe HN should be the packaged output, I might agree. Most people who contribute here seem to obey that rule. Maybe if everyone posted stream of consciousness, this place would become untenable. However, if it goes from 1% to 3%, I think it'd still be manageable and then I could feel delighted at the interspersed nature of it. In other words, almost the opposite of the free rider problem you may have alluded to regarding public goods, or the similarity to it if you think those who provide distilled versions are doing more work for the common good and the others are doing less. In this scenario, I suppose it depends on what one defines as good in the common good.
zlg_codes 3y ago
Go look at America's budget and come back with that ignorance... The amount of money America spends on itself, its people, and its infrastructure, is embarrassing. Taxes are often lauded as a necessary evil, but it's generally not JUST the tax people have trouble with. It's how it's allocated. And we can cutely sidestep or handwave that as "a voting problem", but it's interconnected. I'd have no problem paying taxes to an entity who I could trust and know has my back, who invests in the infrastructure that makes life in this country better. But we cannot trust that entity, it never does what it says it should on paper. It sends money overseas for pet military projects. It doles out countless frivolous contracts to fulfill the gargantuan military budget. Collective pooling of resources only works when the spending of those resources is done for the benefit of everyone contributing. That currently does not happen. I like creature comforts like anyone else, but I'd rather live in a country that gives a shit about me and puts my tax dollars to good use, instead of feeling like livestock in a rat wheel whose contributions to the country will never bear into a tangible benefit.
- voidwtf 3y ago
  Then let’s fight corruption, let’s fight to spend those budgets on educating our populace and having amazing public services. Let’s stop dithering about taxes and create a system of government that punishes corruption and is policed by a wholly different institution. It’s ridiculous to expect any institution that polices itself to not fall into corruption over time.
  - brigandish 3y ago
    The only way to fight corruption is to have a small enough government that it can be a) understood b) watched, and c) isn't too powerful. Much like the systems many on HN work with, if you can't keep a good chunk in your head at once and understand what it might be doing on the border with the bit you can't, then it's probably too big or you start having to give trust to others to understand it and handle it for you. If we want voters to be able to watch and meaningfully impact the government then it must be much, much smaller than any current developed nation's government is.

carlosjobim 3y ago

Can I challenge your view a bit? Yes, the rulers are double-dipping and even quadruple-dipping. But if you think about it, why are taxes so incredibly complicated, like there is not a single thing you can do that isn't taxed? That is because taxation is not the main act, it is only the supportive act. The main act is creating currency from nothing. That is how the rulers get their wealth and finance their government. If you're paying taxes through your nose and think I'm being ridiculous by saying it's only a supportive act, think about this: Why is it so important that you and everybody else pay taxes to the government on your income and everything else, when the government can just print as much money as they need? It is because the money would be worthless without the complicated taxation system. The money origins from the government (it says as much on the bills, even has a signature), and the only way to make anybody actually want that money is to force them to pay it to the government. So that's why there's so many and unavoidable taxes. If you work for a living you have to pay taxes in the government money - so naturally you'll want your wages in government money. If you make business, it's the same thing. And so on. Taxes is the only way that the government can create demand for their worthless money, so that's why you have them.

konschubert 3y ago
That sound very smart but I don't follow the logic. FIAT money is popular because it is popular, and because there is an entity, the central bank, which works towards its stability. FIAT money would still be popular even if you didn't have to pay taxes in it.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- carlosjobim 3y ago
  The logic is that fiat money continually loses value due to inflation, which means that most people want to avoid it if they had the option. The stability that the central bank guarantees is that the currency will continue decrease in value, until it becomes exponential and out of control. Then a currency reform is conducted. The central banks do not try to hide that their goal is inflation, although they aren't very honest about the rate of inflation. I'd say there would be no demand at all for government fiat currency, unless they forced people to use it. In ancient Rome the emperor just diluted the silver coins with other metals and tried to force people to accept it at face value. Then in much of history there was no fiat money to speak of, rulers demanded their tributes in gold or hard goods. But if you demand tributes (taxes) in a currency that only you emit, there will be a demand on that currency. In the real world, we see this in many countries in the world, where as the government does not tightly control the population and their tax payments, they are not able to protect the value of their currency, and their people will use foreign fiat currency as much as they can.