Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We are publishing the tax secrets of the .001%

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 580 posts

Re: We are publishing the tax secrets of the .001%

#21

Post by failwhaleshark »

bwestergard wrote: post #7

In Finland, everyone's taxable income is a matter of public record. One theoretical benefit of such a policy is that it eliminates information asymmetries between workers and employers in wage bargaining.

That makes the lives of gold-diggers easier too.

If it were opt-in that would be fine, otherwise it's an invasion of privacy of most people who aren't rich.

It's almost as bad as having medical conditions and STIs test results listed publicly.

Facilitating public exposure of counting other people's money doesn't help anyone except the rich to know if you can fight them in court or how much to bribe them.

Fight wealth inequality with income-&-holdings-proportional fines; simple, government-calculated graduated taxes without complicated exemptions; elimination of corporate/wealth welfare; and expand economic-advancement-oriented welfare to those who aren't super-rich who can use it.

Re: We are publishing the tax secrets of the .001%

#22

Post by deeblering4 »

bko wrote: post #12
deeblering4 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Imagine dumping hacked facebook user data because you don’t like bugs in Facebook software No need for imagination here... This happens all the time. Data leaks are a regular outcome from security bugs/breeches.

And it's just as unethical in that case as well

Are you suggesting that the top “earners” who manipulate their taxes are acting ethically?

These people deserve (and can afford) every ounce of scrutiny they receive.

Re: We are publishing the tax secrets of the .001%

#23

Post by mlac »

bwestergard wrote: post #7

In Finland, everyone's taxable income is a matter of public record. One theoretical benefit of such a policy is that it eliminates information asymmetries between workers and employers in wage bargaining.

I would also think that this makes neighborhoods less financially diverse. I can’t see someone with a higher than average income moving into a neighborhood knowing that their neighbors might make 1/4th as much. It puts a target on them.

Re: We are publishing the tax secrets of the .001%

#24

Post by mlac »

I would really just like a flat tax. No loopholes or deductions. Very simple. It should not take a masters degree to understand the tax code.

I recognize this is one of the main ways Policy is implemented (incentives can drive certain behavior), but we’ve got hundreds of years of complexity going on and I wouldn’t mind simplifying this.

I don’t know where to start though.

Re: We are publishing the tax secrets of the .001%

#25

Post by deeblering4 »

bko wrote: post #20
deeblering4 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately you are speaking of ideals. In reality a person's right to privacy is dependent on many factors including their country, race, etc. With regards to celebrity, there is absolutely a tradeoff. On paper celebrities have the same civil rights as anyone else, but e.g. have you heard of the paparazzi before?

> Unfortunately you are speaking of ideals. In reality a person's right to privacy is dependent on many factors including their country, race, etc. I disagree. A right is a human right. Human rights are not granted by a country, they can only be violated. My right to free thought and expression doesn't cease being a right if I'm in an oppressive state. A state can violate my rights but human rights are universal. You…

I didn’t disagree. I said it’s an ideal.

Do you seriously think the experience is the same in public between an average citizen and a celebrity? There is a huge trade off that a celebrity accepts when becoming a household name/face.

Re: We are publishing the tax secrets of the .001%

#27

Post by Jonnax »

bko wrote: post #2

> Many will ask about the ethics of publishing such private data. We are doing so — quite selectively and carefully — because we believe it serves the public interest in fundamental ways, allowing readers to see patterns that were until now hidden.... We believe that disclosing the identities of billionaires who paid little to no taxes in years their fortunes grew by billions of dollars will help readers understand t…

Yes. It is.

They are billionaires hiding their wealth.

Leeches on society.

The more money you have, the less right to privacy you have.

That's my opinion.

Your opinion seems to be that you accept that you're a peasant and you wish to lick their boots.

Re: We are publishing the tax secrets of the .001%

#28

Post by lmilcin »

mlac wrote: post #23
bwestergard wrote: post #7

In Finland, everyone's taxable income is a matter of public record. One theoretical benefit of such a policy is that it eliminates information asymmetries between workers and employers in wage bargaining.

I would also think that this makes neighborhoods less financially diverse. I can’t see someone with a higher than average income moving into a neighborhood knowing that their neighbors might make 1/4th as much. It puts a target on them.

You obviously haven't been to Finland.

In Scandinavia, the approach to other person earning couple of times more than you could be summarized by "good for you".

Re: We are publishing the tax secrets of the .001%

#29

Post by lucideer »

mlac wrote: post #24

I would really just like a flat tax. No loopholes or deductions. Very simple. It should not take a masters degree to understand the tax code. I recognize this is one of the main ways Policy is implemented (incentives can drive certain behavior), but we’ve got hundreds of years of complexity going on and I wouldn’t mind simplifying this. I don’t know where to start though.

> I don’t know where to start though.

I would start with "cui bono" and look into learning about the various institutions in place who's main purpose is to maintain the complexity, that would stand to make significant losses (or disappear) if it were simplified.

(just in case this sounds like pessimism or apathy, I don't necessarily think it is. But if one genuinely wants change, one does need to be aware of where hurdles lie)

Re: We are publishing the tax secrets of the .001%

#30

Post by lucideer »

failwhaleshark wrote: post #21
bwestergard wrote: post #7

In Finland, everyone's taxable income is a matter of public record. One theoretical benefit of such a policy is that it eliminates information asymmetries between workers and employers in wage bargaining.

That makes the lives of gold-diggers easier too. If it were opt-in that would be fine, otherwise it's an invasion of privacy of most people who aren't rich. It's almost as bad as having medical conditions and STIs test results listed publicly. Facilitating public exposure of counting other people's money doesn't help anyone except the rich to know if you can fight them in court or how much to bribe them. Fight wealth…

> If it were opt-in that would be fine

If it were opt-in it would be pointless. Surely that's obvious?

> Facilitating public exposure of counting other people's money doesn't help anyone except the rich to know if you can fight them in court or how much to bribe them.

This is a fair point, but I think these are relatively small individual downsides, which are also much more visible (and potentially addressable). Bribery is probably a harder nut to crack, but the legal system favouring the rich (& lawyered up) is something that one can potentially work toward balancing/mitigating with legislative measures.

Post reply on HN