Useful Mental Models (2016) • Hacker News Board

Re: Useful Mental Models (2016)

#71

Post by quickthrower2 » Wed, Jan 10, 2018, 2:56 AM UTC

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #64

quickthrower2 wrote: post #9

It would be good to include some mental models for attitude towards money. Things I have noticed about myself: No problem paying for something that absolutely needs to be done. E.g. repair a leak in the roof. Replace something. Don't notice money spent on regular monthly payments. E.g. mortgage. Don't notice $1000 spent as 50*$20 but more frightening to spend $1000 at once. Fear of loss when investing is big. It feel…

A weird one about myself: Renting a boat at $500/day feels wasteful, but buying a boat for $40,000 doesn't. But I'd have to use that boat for 80 days to get my money back (not counting upkeep, storage, and so on). I probably wouldn't use it that much, not even in two decades.

As the old saying goes, If it floats, flies or (something else, I forget!) it's better to rent it than to buy.

Re: Useful Mental Models (2016)

#72

Post by vkreso » Wed, Jan 10, 2018, 4:05 AM UTC

klausjensen wrote: post #53

fredley wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here in the UK. You can look at how much tax you've paid on your payslip, but you never feel like that money was yours in the first place since it never hits your bank. I had to complete a tax return for the first time last year, although it's completely illogical (and I'd budgeted the number so knew what it would be well in advance), it felt more painful paying the ~£_,000 of extra tax I owed than paying the ~£…

>>...but you never feel like that money was yours in the first place since it never hits your bank. A politician (republican-ish, Scandinavia) once told me, that the whole tax-system would fall apart if people were paid their salaries in full and had to pay their taxes in cash. It is of course absurd and impractical in our day and age, but I think most people are blind to the amount of tax they pay.

Well, salaries paid in full would certainly give more power to the taxpayer who would in turn demand more accountabilty from the politican. Perhaps the politician in your story is a bit biased and is spreading FUD.

Re: Useful Mental Models (2016)

#73

Post by gonzo41 » Wed, Jan 10, 2018, 11:01 AM UTC

haukilup wrote: post #50

gonzo41 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depending on where you live, that extra 5 hundred means that the streets are safe, you have clean drinking water on tap and if you get hit by a car crossing the stree you'll probably make it. And defence and welfare and such and such. suck it up. Taxes have a point.

> suck it up. Taxes have a point. Your comment feels completely out of line. This comment thread is talking about mental models about money. The GP comment isn't complaining about taxes. Most likely, the observation about taxes is to say that earning an additional $1000 income does not translate into the same amount that could be spent. Or something similar, related to the mental model topic they're talking about.

Sorry if my post comes off terse but truthfully there is a narrative in these (hackernews) boards that thinks taxes == bad. I react strongly to this because I live in Australia and we have taxes and they provide a lot of good.

Sure, I pay a bit more in Medicare levy or income tax but I don't ever look at it. I know when I get sick I just go to the doctor and its' sorted, For $70 at that time with a rebate of $35 and then if I'm getting a script filled it's usually under $15 dollars. And if i have no cash i can take a bus a little further out and bulk bill.

The same people who think that taxes are bad in this place are usually (I know I'm generalizing) the same people that bemoan company taxes. Yet if you look at places like Australia and elsewhere it's those same companies that pay no tax in our jurisdictions at all. I appreciate that our laws make this so. But there is the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. And those companies/people make a choice.

Interesting side note: The people who run those companies are usually talking about UBI. Who the f--k is going to pay for that if those companies don't pay tax.

But hey, what do I know I just pay tax and never really worry about it. If I have money I do stuff. If I have less money, I do less stuff.

It's important that peoples mental models of tax do not regress to thinking it's just a cash grab. If you think government wastes money there are plenty of opportunities to get involved to change that or your way of thinking. But reducing the concept of taxes like this a real danger to any form of productive social contract.

Re: Useful Mental Models (2016)

#74

Post by ihaveajob » Wed, Jan 10, 2018, 4:56 PM UTC

fredley wrote: post #36

golergka wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on the country. In US, it seems that everybody does their taxes and all salaries and income are discussed as "before tax"; in Russia, for example, all taxes and payments for employees are done on employer's side and all salaries and income are usually discussed as "after tax" - people don't even usually know how much are they earning "before tax".

Same here in the UK. You can look at how much tax you've paid on your payslip, but you never feel like that money was yours in the first place since it never hits your bank. I had to complete a tax return for the first time last year, although it's completely illogical (and I'd budgeted the number so knew what it would be well in advance), it felt more painful paying the ~£_,000 of extra tax I owed than paying the ~£…

I hate how governments do that. It's as if they're interested in not letting people know how much things cost to run, and making them feel that they're getting a lot for their (seemingly) low taxes.

Re: Useful Mental Models (2016)

#75

Post by jodrellblank » Sun, Jan 14, 2018, 5:07 AM UTC

mrfusion wrote: post #69

The funny thing about expected value. Even if the expected value of a one dollar lottery ticket was ten dollars, it still wouldn’t be worth playing.

People always say lottery tickets have low expected return and aren't worth buying, and then use that to conclude that people are stupid.

Instead of concluding that people do buy lottery tickets, so their model doesn't accurately model "value".