4 ms·

You explained yourself the same problem that you’re trying to dismiss. The vilification will continue until the emphasis is placed where it needs to be, ie goi

You explained yourself the same problem that you’re trying to dismiss. The vilification will continue until the emphasis is placed where it needs to be, ie going after big fish instead of little ones, regardless of which fish are easy targets and easy wins for enforcement quotas, and regardless of whether the enforcement team is 4 people or 4000.

rectang 2y ago
I'm confused. It seems like "They didn’t even bother to think about anything less than $100M" describes "going after big fish instead of little ones".
- photonthug 2y ago
  Yeah but then it’s explained why catching the big fish is hard, and a plea for sympathy due to staff cuts. That won’t work until/unless tax enforcement overall shifts from disproportionately affecting the poor to disproportionately affecting the rich, regardless of some special team of four people that targets big fish. The situation that we actually have is like if a one stoplight town is setting a speed trap because they need revenue.. but they target only old broken minivans going 5mph over, because they know corporate trucks and private red sports cars going 20 over the limit are more likely to have lawyers that buck the speeding ticket, and cost the town revenue instead of collecting it. Is adding more cops to pull over more old minivans really going to help the town buy a public park, or stop sports cars from speeding? It’s not only unfair, but also completely ineffective. Staffing/funding is always going to be a bullshit complaint because structurally, enforcement quotas and complex compliance requirements are always going to tend to create a preference for bureaucracies to punch down at soft targets. Similar to how militarizing police doesn’t actually help fix problems with law enforcement, adding additional “support” (ie weapons) for other institutions that have fundamentally broken politics/policies is not a good idea.
Spooky23 2y ago
You read it wrong and frankly don’t get it. With the limited resources they have, it only makes sense to pursue the most egregious offenders for complex crimes. Enforcement is like fixing shipped code - expensive and difficult. Effective enforcement shapes people’s risk assessment and behavior. You need to work the middle of the bell curve so that people believe there’s risk. It’s funny… the people who push the “starve the beast” agenda want to “back the blue”, as long as they are looking in the direction they prefer.
- photonthug 2y ago
  > With the limited resources they have, it only makes sense to pursue the most egregious offenders for complex crimes. With few resources the wrong people are targeted and I think that’s well established https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2023/01/29/the-irs-continues-to-focus-its-audits-on-poor-people-not-millionaires/# https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2023/01/29/the-irs-... With more resources, there’s every reason to believe that more of the wrong people will be targeted. Why would you believe otherwise?
  - HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
    Forbes, seriously?
- tourmalinetaco 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
    This just sounds like a dime a dozen Libertarian attitude
    - johnisgood 2y ago
      Libertarians are not against private police though.

rectang 2y ago

I'm confused. It seems like "They didn’t even bother to think about anything less than $100M" describes "going after big fish instead of little ones".

photonthug 2y ago
Yeah but then it’s explained why catching the big fish is hard, and a plea for sympathy due to staff cuts. That won’t work until/unless tax enforcement overall shifts from disproportionately affecting the poor to disproportionately affecting the rich, regardless of some special team of four people that targets big fish. The situation that we actually have is like if a one stoplight town is setting a speed trap because they need revenue.. but they target only old broken minivans going 5mph over, because they know corporate trucks and private red sports cars going 20 over the limit are more likely to have lawyers that buck the speeding ticket, and cost the town revenue instead of collecting it. Is adding more cops to pull over more old minivans really going to help the town buy a public park, or stop sports cars from speeding? It’s not only unfair, but also completely ineffective. Staffing/funding is always going to be a bullshit complaint because structurally, enforcement quotas and complex compliance requirements are always going to tend to create a preference for bureaucracies to punch down at soft targets. Similar to how militarizing police doesn’t actually help fix problems with law enforcement, adding additional “support” (ie weapons) for other institutions that have fundamentally broken politics/policies is not a good idea.

Spooky23 2y ago

You read it wrong and frankly don’t get it. With the limited resources they have, it only makes sense to pursue the most egregious offenders for complex crimes. Enforcement is like fixing shipped code - expensive and difficult. Effective enforcement shapes people’s risk assessment and behavior. You need to work the middle of the bell curve so that people believe there’s risk. It’s funny… the people who push the “starve the beast” agenda want to “back the blue”, as long as they are looking in the direction they prefer.

photonthug 2y ago
> With the limited resources they have, it only makes sense to pursue the most egregious offenders for complex crimes. With few resources the wrong people are targeted and I think that’s well established https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2023/01/29/the-irs-continues-to-focus-its-audits-on-poor-people-not-millionaires/# https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2023/01/29/the-irs-... With more resources, there’s every reason to believe that more of the wrong people will be targeted. Why would you believe otherwise?
- HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
  Forbes, seriously?
tourmalinetaco 2y ago
[flagged]
- HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
  This just sounds like a dime a dozen Libertarian attitude
  - johnisgood 2y ago
    Libertarians are not against private police though.