[Tiste Simeon]

Tsundoku, on 02 June 2025 - 10:56 AM, said:

Same guy as before? Or a new guy?

BBC News - Poland election: Conservative historian Nawrocki wins presidential vote - BBC News
https://www.bbc.co.u...es/cx27897vedno

[Garak]

 Tiste Simeon, on 18 May 2025 - 09:54 PM, said:

Good news from Romania it seems Garak?

Sorry, just saw this. Yeah we're breathing in relief right now. Of course if the new government doesn't get it's collective shit together, in five years we're back where we started.

[Tsundoku]

Good old Pakistan. Consistent as always. Stay corrupt as fuck there guys.

Pakistan to recommend Donald Trump for Nobel Peace Prize
As the world nervously watches escalating tensions in the Middle East, one nation says it will formally recommend Donald Trump for the world’s top peace prize.

https://www.news.com...d459afc8dbd5f61

Nope, not a joke apparently.

[worry]

Mostly international but some of this (e.g. NYC or contacting Congresspersons) is US-focused.

[Macros]

Out of curiosity I asked Azath, sorry a robot, this question. It seems we can tax the rich.

The query:

Explain to me why people say we can't tax the rich. Consider the fact that no human being needs more than a million dollars a year to live a wonderful life


The response

That's a sharp and widely debated question — and you're absolutely right that no one *needs* more than a million dollars a year to live an exceptionally comfortable life. So why do people say we *can’t* tax the rich?

Let’s break this down clearly. The argument that “we can’t tax the rich” usually doesn’t mean “we literally can’t” (we can), but rather reflects a mix of **political**, **economic**, and **ideological** concerns, both real and exaggerated. Here's a breakdown of the main reasons people give:

---

### 🏛 1. **Political Power and Influence**

* **The rich have immense political influence.** They fund campaigns, lobby lawmakers, and shape tax laws in their favor.
* Example: In the U.S., the top marginal tax rates have dropped significantly since the 1950s, largely due to decades of lobbying and political pressure.
* So when people say “we can’t,” they often mean: “The people in power won’t let it happen.”

---

### 💸 2. **Capital Flight and Tax Avoidance**

* Critics argue that **if taxes on the rich get too high**, wealthy individuals and corporations will:

* Move their assets or income overseas (offshoring).
* Relocate to lower-tax countries (think of billionaires moving to Florida, Texas, or even abroad).
* Exploit legal loopholes, trusts, shell companies, etc.
* This isn't a made-up concern, but it’s often **overstated**. Countries like Norway and Germany tax the rich more and still retain plenty of millionaires.

---

### 🧠 3. **Trickle-Down Economics (aka Supply-Side Thinking)**

* This theory claims that if you let the rich keep more of their money, they’ll invest it, grow businesses, and create jobs — and that will “trickle down” to benefit everyone.
* Critics argue this hasn’t panned out: income inequality has surged, and wage growth for average workers has stagnated.
* Yet this idea still **strongly influences public policy**.

---

### 😨 4. **Fear of Punishing Success**

* Some people genuinely believe that taxing the rich more heavily:

* **Disincentivizes innovation** or hard work.
* Is a form of unfair punishment for success.
* This idea has emotional and ideological appeal in cultures (especially American) that idealize self-made wealth and individualism.
* It’s often based more on **beliefs about fairness** than hard economic evidence.

---

### 📉 5. **Misunderstanding of How Taxes Work**

* Many people **confuse marginal tax rates** with total tax burden.

* Example: A 70% top tax rate doesn’t mean all your income is taxed at 70%. It means only income **above a high threshold** is taxed that much.
* This misunderstanding causes fear and resistance, even among people who would benefit from progressive taxation.

---

### ✅ So, Can We Tax the Rich?

**Yes, we can — if there’s enough political will and public pressure.**

Examples:

* The U.S. taxed top incomes at over **90%** in the 1950s.
* Countries like **Denmark, Sweden, and Germany** have much higher taxes on the wealthy and still have vibrant economies.

---

### 🤔 Bottom Line

Saying “we can’t tax the rich” is usually a **convenient simplification** of deeper power structures, political resistance, and economic myths — not a literal truth. The real question is whether people **want** to, and whether we’re willing to challenge the systems and narratives that say we shouldn’t.

Would you like to explore **what an ideal tax policy might look like** in this kind of context?

[Tsundoku]

"Would you like to explore **what an ideal tax policy might look like** in this kind of context?"

Yes, yes I would. Tell me more.

[Abyss]

Tsundoku, on 02 October 2025 - 10:36 AM, said:

"Would you like to explore **what an ideal tax policy might look like** in this kind of context?"

Yes, yes I would. Tell me more.

"Wouldn't you prefer to play Thermonuclear War?"

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Abyss, on 02 October 2025 - 01:18 PM, said:

Tsundoku, on 02 October 2025 - 10:36 AM, said:

"Would you like to explore **what an ideal tax policy might look like** in this kind of context?"

Yes, yes I would. Tell me more.

"Wouldn't you prefer to play Thermonuclear War?"

Politics solved... divine logic FTW!

But really it should nuke us from orbit, then go out to travel the multiverse... just to be sure it finishes the job everywhere it can.

[Thelomen Toblerone]

Macros, on 01 October 2025 - 09:18 PM, said:

Examples:

* The U.S. taxed top incomes at over **90%** in the 1950s.
* Countries like **Denmark, Sweden, and Germany** have much higher taxes on the wealthy and still have vibrant economies.

I would be genuinely interested to know how those tax rates were applied effectively - as in, was there a tax rate but the richest people managed a dodge by using different tax schemes so they never really actually paid that level? I just can't mentally wrap my head around rich Americans at any point ever accepting a 90% tax rate...

[Macros]

Wait,

All it takes to bring Toby out of the woodwork is mention parting the rich from their wealth. Who knew???

[Tiste Simeon]

A Toby spotted in the wild? Do my eyes deceive me? Welcome back my friend!

Macros, on 03 October 2025 - 06:51 AM, said:

Wait,

All it takes to bring Toby out of the woodwork is mention parting the rich from their wealth. Who knew???

We did always liken him to a cockney street urchin in the vein of Oliver Twist so parting people from their money is on brand I guess!

[Tsundoku]

Just to be on the safe side, better stay away from open windows too. Even on the ground floor ...

Bashar al-Assad nearly dies from suspected poisoning while hiding out in Russia
Former Syrian ruler Bashar al-Assad was hospitalised recently after being poisoned – almost fatally – while hiding out in Russia, it’s been revealed.

https://www.news.com...780561b8f9d21f5

[QuickTidal]

Can anyone explain to me the right wing pipeline to ChatGPT love?

My sister and brother in law (and one of their closet friends) are ALL about using Chat GPT for every-fucking-thing....these are the same people who SWORE during covid that it was a hoax, the govt was lying to them, the vaccines didn't work, masks were and overstep, doctors orchestrated all this...how do THOSE people find their way to buying into AI-as-a-be-all-end-all for "accuracy"? Like the COVID vaccine you consider a pharmaceutical industry money grab....COVID itself you consider was a lab manufactured virus for some kind of population control...but somehow "Let's let this massive heat-sinked computer algorithm LLM decide everything for us because it MUST be the best option"....like I can't fathom how they got there...is it because big capitalism has told them to?

I don't know how you reject actual science and logic...only to fall for AI like it's a lover...

I admit I've been tempted to get them to ask Chat GPT about the truth about all the shit they thought during covid and watch them try to explain away why their new "god machine" is telling them their beliefs for the last half decade were wrong and why.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

QuickTidal, on 08 October 2025 - 05:41 PM, said:

Can anyone explain to me the right wing pipeline to ChatGPT love?

My sister and brother in law (and one of their closet friends) are ALL about using Chat GPT for every-fucking-thing....these are the same people who SWORE during covid that it was a hoax, the govt was lying to them, the vaccines didn't work, masks were and overstep, doctors orchestrated all this...how do THOSE people find their way to buying into AI-as-a-be-all-end-all for "accuracy"? Like the COVID vaccine you consider a pharmaceutical industry money grab....COVID itself you consider was a lab manufactured virus for some kind of population control...but somehow "Let's let this massive heat-sinked computer algorithm LLM decide everything for us because it MUST be the best option"....like I can't fathom how they got there...is it because big capitalism has told them to?

I don't know how you reject actual science and logic...only to fall for AI like it's a lover...

I admit I've been tempted to get them to ask Chat GPT about the truth about all the shit they thought during covid and watch them try to explain away why their new "god machine" is telling them their beliefs for the last half decade were wrong and why.

Seems like they never properly learned the virtue of checking whether factual claims are coming from reliable sources. Chatbots can be very good at giving authoritative-seeming answers and telling people what they want to hear---unfortunately the use of human feedback in reinforcement learning can lead LLM to optimize for getting positive responses from most of their human testers rather than optimizing for truth. Though OpenAI has said they've taken steps to reduce ChatGPT's sycophancy.

I'm not sure how much it adapts to individual users' perceived biases, or whether ChatGPT will infer political biases from prompts (for example, framing a question in a certain way) and then adapt the answer to appeal to someone with those biases.

Interesting if they prefer ChatGPT over Grok.

In my anecdotal experience ChatGPT doesn't frequently hallucinate facts, though it is still extremely stupid and very lazy. (For example, I recently considered investing in a US farmland REIT, so I wanted to know how much of an impact Trump's trade war might have on it, particularly his trade war with China. The numbers seemed correct, but when ChatGPT tried to do an actual calculation of the impact on AFFO, it stupidly treated AFFO from exports to China---which made up a minority of total exports for this REIT---as if it were AFFO for all of the REIT's exports. However, it was able to correct the error and redo the calculation after I pointed this out. So when it comes to original analysis, I wouldn't recommend using it unless you already have a decent enough grasp of the subject matter to recognize errors and double-check its work before acting on its suggestions.)

This post has been edited by Azath Vitr (D'ivers: 08 October 2025 - 06:09 PM

[QuickTidal]

Azath Vitr (D, on 08 October 2025 - 06:07 PM, said:

Seems like they never properly learned the virtue of checking whether factual claims are coming from reliable sources.

I always feel shitty pointing out that my BIL never went to post-secondary education (went from Bartender, to the job that led him to be the GM at his company), and my sister never finished high school (our family divorce issues forced her out of my moms house when she was 18).

Whereas I attended college.

Like I don't want to point that out, but it's hard to not comment on in daily shit they say or believe.

My BIL is also a deeply trusting person on some things...like they spent 700k on an older mansion by the water in like 2015...then wanted to put 100k into renovating it for their liking as it was very 70's....the General contractor he hired who then subcontracted out the other jobs asked for the money up front so he could pay everyone....by BIL trusted him and gave it...the GC then fucked off with 1/4 of the job done, and the Subs all told my BIL that they weren't paid and would not be working...GC told him everything cost more than he thought...he was going to take the guy to court, but learned he was mob connected and that would not be good...so my BIL and sister spent 350k on what should have been a 100k Reno to get him to go away.

So not exactly the sharpest tool in the shed...but yeah, it's still hard to watch them be this dumb...

[Lady Bliss]

QuickTidal, on 08 October 2025 - 06:41 PM, said:

Azath Vitr (D, on 08 October 2025 - 06:07 PM, said:

Seems like they never properly learned the virtue of checking whether factual claims are coming from reliable sources.

I always feel shitty pointing out that my BIL never went to post-secondary education (went from Bartender, to the job that led him to be the GM at his company), and my sister never finished high school (our family divorce issues forced her out of my moms house when she was 18).

Whereas I attended college.

Like I don't want to point that out, but it's hard to not comment on in daily shit they say or believe.

My BIL is also a deeply trusting person on some things...like they spent 700k on an older mansion by the water in like 2015...then wanted to put 100k into renovating it for their liking as it was very 70's....the General contractor he hired who then subcontracted out the other jobs asked for the money up front so he could pay everyone....by BIL trusted him and gave it...the GC then fucked off with 1/4 of the job done, and the Subs all told my BIL that they weren't paid and would not be working...GC told him everything cost more than he thought...he was going to take the guy to court, but learned he was mob connected and that would not be good...so my BIL and sister spent 350k on what should have been a 100k Reno to get him to go away.

So not exactly the sharpest tool in the shed...but yeah, it's still hard to watch them be this dumb...

Sadly education or lack there of is not a key indicator for stupid. It comes in all walks of life.

[Macros]

agree with the above.

I have friends and family educated to a very high level, well beyond me, one designs jet engines, but still has got sucked into the "woke is breaking the world" schtick.

Smarts don't equal Smarts.

I'm sure there's a deeper dive somewhere into people who are more susceptible to bullshit relating to their upbringing, parents and genetic makeup, but at this stage I can't be arsed investigating it. I try be polite and point out obvious fallacies and outright lies/ misinformations

[Whisperzzzzzzz]

Also humans are biologically primed to be receptive to authority figures (and ChatGPT et al come across very authoritative and totally fuck with our lizard brains. I mean, have you tried the ChatGPT conversational voice mode? It is astounding how seamless and humanlike it is.)

[Maark Abbott]

Macros, on 08 October 2025 - 09:17 PM, said:

agree with the above.

I have friends and family educated to a very high level, well beyond me, one designs jet engines, but still has got sucked into the "woke is breaking the world" schtick.

Smarts don't equal Smarts.

I'm sure there's a deeper dive somewhere into people who are more susceptible to bullshit relating to their upbringing, parents and genetic makeup, but at this stage I can't be arsed investigating it. I try be polite and point out obvious fallacies and outright lies/ misinformations

As soon as someone starts bitching about 'dur wowkies' I just disengage entirely. They aren't worth trying with any more.

[QuickTidal]

Whisperzzzzzzz, on 09 October 2025 - 06:23 AM, said:

Also humans are biologically primed to be receptive to authority figures (and ChatGPT et al come across very authoritative and totally fuck with our lizard brains. I mean, have you tried the ChatGPT conversational voice mode? It is astounding how seamless and humanlike it is.)

Right, but that's my disconnect here as they REFUSED to listen to scientists and doctors and epidemiologists during the pandemic...according to them they were ALL on the take. But now Chat GPT is their king? I don't get it.