3 ms·

Are you serious? Your solution to fix commuting is to punish people who may depend on a job that's not in close proximity? Really... I have a job I depend heavi

by datalus 13y ago

Are you serious? Your solution to fix commuting is to punish people who may depend on a job that's not in close proximity? Really... I have a job I depend heavily on and to make my life even more burdensome just seems inhumane. Please never get elected to office. Edit: To be fair, I work 2 days from home, but the idea of taxing people who may have no other option disgusts me. You probably can't even begin to identify with them.

maxerickson 13y ago
I was quietly thinking out loud. So yes, I was perfectly serious. If some method of taxation was narrowly burdensome, I probably wouldn't think it was sensible. But, for instance, maybe there is a way to (relatively objectively) identify businesses that employ lots of people but are less location sensitive. Some mild tax on such a business should not have an enormous impact on the employees (I immediately see an objection to this idea, the cost of maintaining a location already provides similar pressure).
- ak39 13y ago
  Punitive measures for folks who are already being punished because they ostensibly ALLOWED themselves to be punished??
  - maxerickson 13y ago
    I would say you are over-analyzing my word choice. As I noted, congestion taxes have a similar goal (reducing traffic), but less questionable motivations (they generally directly address externalities rather than behavior). I was coming at it from the perspective of thinking about mechanisms that might be useful to try to shift aggregate group behavior towards something that is better for everybody. I certainly wasn't insisting that it was sensible.
ak39 13y ago
Felt the same way. Is this a perfect example of the sociopath Hugh Macleod apex personality or what?!
- maxerickson 13y ago
  If I was pursuing the thought in a way that had negative consequences for other people I could see room to question my motivations and empathy. As it is, you are basically just shouting at me because you didn't like what crossed my mind.

by datalus 13y ago

maxerickson 13y ago

I was quietly thinking out loud. So yes, I was perfectly serious. If some method of taxation was narrowly burdensome, I probably wouldn't think it was sensible. But, for instance, maybe there is a way to (relatively objectively) identify businesses that employ lots of people but are less location sensitive. Some mild tax on such a business should not have an enormous impact on the employees (I immediately see an objection to this idea, the cost of maintaining a location already provides similar pressure).

ak39 13y ago
Punitive measures for folks who are already being punished because they ostensibly ALLOWED themselves to be punished??
- maxerickson 13y ago
  I would say you are over-analyzing my word choice. As I noted, congestion taxes have a similar goal (reducing traffic), but less questionable motivations (they generally directly address externalities rather than behavior). I was coming at it from the perspective of thinking about mechanisms that might be useful to try to shift aggregate group behavior towards something that is better for everybody. I certainly wasn't insisting that it was sensible.

ak39 13y ago

Felt the same way. Is this a perfect example of the sociopath Hugh Macleod apex personality or what?!

maxerickson 13y ago
If I was pursuing the thought in a way that had negative consequences for other people I could see room to question my motivations and empathy. As it is, you are basically just shouting at me because you didn't like what crossed my mind.