4 ms·

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 t

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.
    - garba_dlm 3y ago
      > HN should be the packaged output, I might agree. Most people who contribute here seem to obey that rule. the submissions: yes, absolutely yes. I agree 100%. but not for the comments, after all comments are literally the "inner workings" of the HN culture (some people call this "hive mind")
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
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.

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.
  - garba_dlm 3y ago
    > HN should be the packaged output, I might agree. Most people who contribute here seem to obey that rule. the submissions: yes, absolutely yes. I agree 100%. but not for the comments, after all comments are literally the "inner workings" of the HN culture (some people call this "hive mind")
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

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.