3 ms·

Its not a question of who is better at managing money but more who needs benefit in our society. The government supports welfare programs. Someone throwing 100m

Its not a question of who is better at managing money but more who needs benefit in our society. The government supports welfare programs. Someone throwing 100m in the market does not unless they are taxed to do so.

sbsudbdjd 2y ago
The US government burns money unproductively like California wild fire through a citrus field. And there are better ways to deal with our oligarchs than braids dead proposals. Start breaking up their monopolies for one.
- timeon 2y ago
  > there are better ways to deal with our oligarchs Such as?
  - sbsudbdjd 2y ago
    For starters break up their companies. We did it for standard oil, we did it for AT&T.
    - amrocha 2y ago
      Even if you took away all of Elons company he’s still the richest person in the world.
- yadaeno 2y ago
  The government will spend the money regardless. Does the money come from 1. inflation - a regressive tax that disproportionately takes from the poor 2. taxation as a % of wealth - takes from everyone equally The fact is the rich pay a WAY lower tax rate, we can spend the next 1000 years playing legal cat and mouse over how to tax these people but it doesn’t get us closer to option 2 unless the government gets aggressive about collecting tax.
muaytimbo 2y ago
Totally agree, it doesn't matter who earned the money, only that the government needs it for welfare
- treyd 2y ago
  Or to, you know, build roads and trains and stuff.
  - throw10920 2y ago
    The US government, both at the federal and state level, is extremely inefficient at building infrastructure, in terms of value per dollar spent. Proposing that we should continue to throw more money at infrastructure, before diagnosing and fixing the problems that are causing that inefficiency (at which point, sure, double the infra budget - as long as we're getting good value, the absolute amount can go up as far as I'm concerned), is straight-up malicious. The only people who make the argument to keep increasing the infrastructure budget before fixing the problems are those generically interested in throwing more money and power at the government, not those actually concerned about infrastructure (who will seek to fix the problem first).
    - amrocha 2y ago
      What private company in the US is building infrastructure more efficiently than the government?
    - somewhat_drunk 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - dang 2y ago
        We've banned this account for repeatedly posting personal attacks and flamewar-style comments. You can't do that here, no matter how wrong another person is or you feel they are. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
streblo 2y ago
The government also supports bombing the living fuck out of people on the other side of the world. Similarly, someone throwing 100m in the market does not unless they are taxed to do so.
- bulletsvshumans 2y ago
  Unless they own any defense stocks.
Nathanba 2y ago
But they are being taxed for anything they will do with their 100m in the market... including property tax if they do nothing

sbsudbdjd 2y ago

The US government burns money unproductively like California wild fire through a citrus field. And there are better ways to deal with our oligarchs than braids dead proposals. Start breaking up their monopolies for one.

timeon 2y ago
> there are better ways to deal with our oligarchs Such as?
- sbsudbdjd 2y ago
  For starters break up their companies. We did it for standard oil, we did it for AT&T.
  - amrocha 2y ago
    Even if you took away all of Elons company he’s still the richest person in the world.
yadaeno 2y ago
The government will spend the money regardless. Does the money come from 1. inflation - a regressive tax that disproportionately takes from the poor 2. taxation as a % of wealth - takes from everyone equally The fact is the rich pay a WAY lower tax rate, we can spend the next 1000 years playing legal cat and mouse over how to tax these people but it doesn’t get us closer to option 2 unless the government gets aggressive about collecting tax.

muaytimbo 2y ago

Totally agree, it doesn't matter who earned the money, only that the government needs it for welfare

treyd 2y ago
Or to, you know, build roads and trains and stuff.
- throw10920 2y ago
  The US government, both at the federal and state level, is extremely inefficient at building infrastructure, in terms of value per dollar spent. Proposing that we should continue to throw more money at infrastructure, before diagnosing and fixing the problems that are causing that inefficiency (at which point, sure, double the infra budget - as long as we're getting good value, the absolute amount can go up as far as I'm concerned), is straight-up malicious. The only people who make the argument to keep increasing the infrastructure budget before fixing the problems are those generically interested in throwing more money and power at the government, not those actually concerned about infrastructure (who will seek to fix the problem first).
  - amrocha 2y ago
    What private company in the US is building infrastructure more efficiently than the government?
  - somewhat_drunk 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - dang 2y ago
      We've banned this account for repeatedly posting personal attacks and flamewar-style comments. You can't do that here, no matter how wrong another person is or you feel they are. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

streblo 2y ago

The government also supports bombing the living fuck out of people on the other side of the world. Similarly, someone throwing 100m in the market does not unless they are taxed to do so.

bulletsvshumans 2y ago
Unless they own any defense stocks.

Nathanba 2y ago

But they are being taxed for anything they will do with their 100m in the market... including property tax if they do nothing