1. 12
  1.  

  2. 11

    I thought it is pretty obvious that we’re trying to suppress wages. However, that’s where my agreement ends. What we need is dramatically higher taxes for income and inheritance above a certain threshold. I’m thinking like 90% tax (progressive) on individual income exceeding 100x 2000x minimum wage per hour (a nice $3M at $15 an hour) and twice that for inheritance (also progressive). We will need broad agreement to make sure no one has “attractive” tax regime. We then fund basic income with this money and do something which we’ve needed to do for a long time: cut costs.

    We need to cut costs in education. We need to cut costs in healthcare. We need to cut costs in real estate. Cutting costs is very important for this plan to succeed. No more nimbyism. We make sure nobody starves or dies from simple diseases but no more tax credits or deductions for anything. There well be some pain but it will be worth it.

    1. 1

      Well, I agree with increasing efficiency.

      1. -5

        Wow.. I know I shouldn’t bother but you’re just too much..

        You’re basically suggesting that governments everywhere rob “overly wealthy” people super fucking hard, and prevent them from being able to escape that robbery anywhere, and.. somehow you expect them to keep working hard so that the ass-raping can continue indefinitely so that you can sit at home and.. pursue your lifelong dream of finger-painting abstract art, for the betterment of mankind?

        Look at your country’s budget numbers and do some basic math on what it would cost to give everyone “free money forever”.

        Then think about things from a productive person’s perspective. If 100% of the fruits of your labour are forcefully taken away, you’re an outright fucking slave. If 50% are taken away, you’re like a 50% slave.

        You are not the arbiter of how much money is “enough” for anyone else. You can decide how much money is enough for you, personally, but other people are their own, separate, living, breathing individuals.

        Wake the fuck up from your socialist stupor.

        1. 9

          Could we please not use terms like “ass-raping” so lightly? This is a forum for adults and professionals, and at the very least I’d hope we can all be respectful to each other.

          1. -5

            Oh gosh golly gee, someone has a potty mouth!

          2. 5

            Then think about things from a productive person’s perspective. If 100% of the fruits of your labour are forcefully taken away, you’re an outright fucking slave. If 50% are taken away, you’re like a 50% slave.

            You probably need to define what you mean by a productive person. And it’s not “forcefully taken away”, “robbery”, “ass-raping”. You declare your taxes and pay them. Most levels of remuneration rise/fall based on effective tax rates. The rules are well understood. Don’t want to pay so much, tough luck.

            You are not the arbiter of how much money is “enough” for anyone else. You can decide how much money is enough for you, personally, but other people are their own, separate, living, breathing individuals.

            What about consensus and rules that are aimed at leveling the playing field in terms of opportunity? If you went out for pizza with 3 friends and 1 of them took 9 slices because he decided that was enough for him, would the rest of you be cool with that?

            1. -3

              And it’s not “forcefully taken away”, “robbery”, “ass-raping”.

              Sure it is.

              You declare your taxes and pay them.

              You seem to be overlooking the “.. or else!” part, which is what makes it robbery, and to be more precise: extortion.

            2. 5

              The super wealthy aren’t generally that way because they ‘work hard’ or ‘are productive’, they are generally that way because of theft* or inherited wealth. So yes, we should tax their income, their wealth itself, inheritances, and so forth, and make sure that there is nowhere they can escape it. Also, taxation isn’t even vaguely similar to slavery.

              *: Theft here meaning everything from colonial plunder to corrupt self dealing to rentiership to exploiting workers, and so forth.

              1. 1

                what you mean by ‘super wealthy’ or ‘generally’? You should be more specific with some references.

                The only millionaire I know personally, worked hard, but also efficiently, and was very intelligent in the way he did business. He doesn’t work 1000 times harder than others, but he never exploited anyone or stole anything to my knowledge. More importantly, there was nothing stopping another person from doing what he was doing.

                1. 2

                  I think 100x minimum wage is generous enough. I’m sorry but I didn’t mean it to sound like taxation as a punishment. I apologize for my poor choice of words. Yes, taxes are involuntary for the individual but it isn’t about taking from Peter to give to Paul.

                  I oppose the current plan for “free college” in New York. I think no government program should have a ceiling for income.

                  I think we need better propaganda around taxation. We should try to make people feel proud for paying taxes. This is why I want to reduce government spending (the administrative overhead). I don’t think it will be easy or straightforward but I believe it is possible.

                  1. -2

                    For your sake, I hope you’re trolling.

              2. 4

                The business takes a percent of my surplus labor that is likely much higher than 50% because they have money, higher taxes would help remedy that. You’ve focused on the government taking your money and have blindly ignored the individual taking your money.

                1. 4

                  somehow you expect them to keep working hard so that the ass-raping can continue indefinitely so that you can sit at home and.

                  Many poor people are working very hard as well. Working 3 or 4 jobs and not making it out of poverty. The idea that people are rich because of hard work doesn’t seem to have much evidence behind it and there is some evidence that many rich people are there because of luck. That isn’t to say they don’t work hard but rather that taxing them doesn’t mean their hard work is being taxed but rather their luck.

                  1. -1

                    People don’t seem to realize that tax is letting someone else spend your money in terribly inefficient ways, or they will lock you up. Also, the threshold for ‘wealthy’ is always higher than the person suggesting it earns.

                2. 4

                  If demand were soaring, you’d expect wages to rise sharply in response. Instead, salaries have stagnated.

                  What?

                  It goes on to cite the antitrust case against the Bay Area tech companies. Why did they collude to keep wages down if wages weren’t rising? And afterwards, didn’t wages go up? (Spoiler: yes, quite a bit.)

                  And if H1-B immigration is keeping wages down, how, when we the number has been flat - except for a spike around the dot-com bubble which famously produced high compensation for techies.

                  And nine years of H1-B data is trivial to download. Filtering for ‘computer’, ‘software’, or ‘developer’ in the title and normalize the salary period to see if software H1-B salaries are stagnating or not. (Spoiler: not.)

                  Really it’s weird because the article would make a stronger case for wage suppression if it correctly reported that wages were rising instead of claiming they’re stagnating.

                  And then, speaking of weird, after touching on Code.org (which could be part of an excellent argument), it drops wages entirely to spend its back half rambling about Silicon Valley’s place in politics, educational politics, and capitalism generally.

                  1. 1

                    Yeah, that was the weirdest thing to me too. All I could think was: if there’s no shortage, why do they pay so much?

                  2. 2

                    I kinda disagree. I’m going to teach my kids to code so that they necessarily will become coders. I’m going to teach my kids to code so that they will be extremely computer literate whatever field they land in. I hope that as a result they can make a better living and a better life for themselves; I fear for a future where technology is omnipresent but the understanding of it is non-existent.

                    I think it will make them fierce wherever they work, and hopefully they’ll be able to detect useless steps that add no value. Hell, if they only use it to navigate through the oceans of the internet without getting nasty viruses I will have won.

                    1. 1

                      Contrary to public perception, the economy doesn’t actually need that many more programmers

                      I don’t disagree that every rush-to-educate results in flooding. But we do need many more programmers than we have.

                      1. 1

                        I think the focus on more coding schools in Universities due to the wage-suppressing power of Silicon Valley is a quantum leap in logic that isn’t justified. Although programmers might think so, Silicon Valley actually isn’t that powerful with only a handful of companies showing elite behavior like infiltrating/bribing governments and setting deals with schools to control them. Those are mostly the ones like Microsoft and IBM that have been doing it for decades, too.

                        The variable that they have to eliminate before jumping to that conclusion is what the schools themselves want. They have their own politics and power structure that determines what they will focus on. I’d guess what they do comes from a combo of policymakers, funding organizations for the schools, funding organizations for research, local donors, the heads of the schools, and interests groups in them. These will also be reading media and interacting with industry. Just a few of them hearing “shortage of programmers” repeated constantly in media and by industry people by itself might make them increase amount of budget dedicated to that. There was even a push from Barrack Obama in 2013 for people to learn to code.

                        So, there’s a lot of places this could be coming from before we say it’s all due to a massive act of power by Bay Area companies trying to get cheap labor. Bay Area companies that haven’t shown power over most educational institutions to begin with.

                        1. 0

                          Great article, never thought of it this way before but it makes perfect sense.