3 ms·

Every one of us has a vested interest in stable financial markets. I am for any law that helps make financial markets serve businesses and society and not high

Every one of us has a vested interest in stable financial markets. I am for any law that helps make financial markets serve businesses and society and not high-stake casino players. We need laws like this because of the endless supply of greedy assholes who want to game the system. This extends to other areas like systematic tax avoidance used by rich individuals and large corporations.

1971genocide 11y ago
Wait. So you are saying to solve the problem of rich individuals and large corporations from using tax loopholes, we need to implement more laws ? Do you seriously think that solution will work ? When was the last time you though looking at shitty code "hey ! do you know how to solve the problems in this shitty code, write more shitty code !" I do not think the problem is as complicated as it is made out to be. The tax code is already freaking huge ! no human nor even the people making them can read all of it. Every time you try to "fix" the problem by introducing more laws you make it easier for rich ppl to find new loopholes. Its the same thing with MPAA trying to stop ppl from torrenting, or ISPs trying to block websites.
- bbcbasic 11y ago
  Interesting, but I can't see a solution in your reply. Unless you are saying we should let the market be free, so we can have insider trading and big corps that pay less tax than a janitor (in $ terms not just %)? Laws can be reformed. Ideally laws are tidied. To reuse your analogy: "hey ! do you know how to solve the problems in this shitty code, <<refactor>>"
  - 1971genocide 11y ago
    yes ! refactoring. I am not going to talk about my solution since its way too radical for HN. I do not think a libertarian approach will work. What you want is to prevent having any single subset of the human population from having too much power. Any single government ( cough US, China, India ) or company. We want the capacity to dynamically react to events much quicker. Look at the largest companies on the planet, Its almost impossible for them to react to changes in technology etc. And companies are not even that big compared to countries. How long do you think its going to take the US,Indian,Chinese govt to implement a voting system that takes the same effort an facebook like ? I know it sounds crazy, but its technically possible to do it. If you break up all these large countries into small countries it wont be possible for things like wall-street to exist in the first place. Local voters can see their elected representative rather than have someone 1000s of miles away making decisions for them. I derive these types of thinking from my experience in software and algorithm. when was the last time you saw a algorithm that does everything ? the best ones are small. It also doesn't take away the capacity for humans to embark on large projects. If you can get concussion you can do all sorts of cool projects. Anyway My thinking is really radical and its going to be 100s of years before we are there.
    - bbcbasic 11y ago
      >> I am not going to talk about my solution since its way too radical for HN. I do not think a libertarian approach will work. Libertarian seems to have different definitions depending on what I read about it, so I will just have to imagine what you mean :-o.
- TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
  >So you are saying to solve the problem of rich individuals and large corporations from using tax loopholes, we need to implement more laws ? Not just implement, but pursue and regulate aggressively. >Every time you try to "fix" the problem by introducing more laws you make it easier for rich ppl to find new loopholes. Not if you do it right. I don't know about the US, but the problem in the UK is that the same big accountancy firms that advise high net worth individuals about tax evasion also advise the UK government about tax laws. Obviously they have a limited interest in producing strong laws that are actually effective - which is not a surprise when so many MPs, party funders, and Lords benefit from their services. The real problem is that you can't make this work in a plutocracy. It's a political issue caused by a deficit of real democracy and representation, not a legal issue caused by poor law making. I'd guess Wall St works a little differently. But it sill seems as if there isn't as much oversight as there might be.

1971genocide 11y ago

Wait. So you are saying to solve the problem of rich individuals and large corporations from using tax loopholes, we need to implement more laws ? Do you seriously think that solution will work ? When was the last time you though looking at shitty code "hey ! do you know how to solve the problems in this shitty code, write more shitty code !" I do not think the problem is as complicated as it is made out to be. The tax code is already freaking huge ! no human nor even the people making them can read all of it. Every time you try to "fix" the problem by introducing more laws you make it easier for rich ppl to find new loopholes. Its the same thing with MPAA trying to stop ppl from torrenting, or ISPs trying to block websites.

bbcbasic 11y ago
Interesting, but I can't see a solution in your reply. Unless you are saying we should let the market be free, so we can have insider trading and big corps that pay less tax than a janitor (in $ terms not just %)? Laws can be reformed. Ideally laws are tidied. To reuse your analogy: "hey ! do you know how to solve the problems in this shitty code, <<refactor>>"
- 1971genocide 11y ago
  yes ! refactoring. I am not going to talk about my solution since its way too radical for HN. I do not think a libertarian approach will work. What you want is to prevent having any single subset of the human population from having too much power. Any single government ( cough US, China, India ) or company. We want the capacity to dynamically react to events much quicker. Look at the largest companies on the planet, Its almost impossible for them to react to changes in technology etc. And companies are not even that big compared to countries. How long do you think its going to take the US,Indian,Chinese govt to implement a voting system that takes the same effort an facebook like ? I know it sounds crazy, but its technically possible to do it. If you break up all these large countries into small countries it wont be possible for things like wall-street to exist in the first place. Local voters can see their elected representative rather than have someone 1000s of miles away making decisions for them. I derive these types of thinking from my experience in software and algorithm. when was the last time you saw a algorithm that does everything ? the best ones are small. It also doesn't take away the capacity for humans to embark on large projects. If you can get concussion you can do all sorts of cool projects. Anyway My thinking is really radical and its going to be 100s of years before we are there.
  - bbcbasic 11y ago
    >> I am not going to talk about my solution since its way too radical for HN. I do not think a libertarian approach will work. Libertarian seems to have different definitions depending on what I read about it, so I will just have to imagine what you mean :-o.
TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
>So you are saying to solve the problem of rich individuals and large corporations from using tax loopholes, we need to implement more laws ? Not just implement, but pursue and regulate aggressively. >Every time you try to "fix" the problem by introducing more laws you make it easier for rich ppl to find new loopholes. Not if you do it right. I don't know about the US, but the problem in the UK is that the same big accountancy firms that advise high net worth individuals about tax evasion also advise the UK government about tax laws. Obviously they have a limited interest in producing strong laws that are actually effective - which is not a surprise when so many MPs, party funders, and Lords benefit from their services. The real problem is that you can't make this work in a plutocracy. It's a political issue caused by a deficit of real democracy and representation, not a legal issue caused by poor law making. I'd guess Wall St works a little differently. But it sill seems as if there isn't as much oversight as there might be.