Derek Sivers Renounces his US Citizenship • Hacker News Board

Re: Derek Sivers Renounces his US Citizenship

#121

Post by gnaritas » Tue, May 08, 2012, 6:40 PM UTC

marshallp wrote: post #62

maratd wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm an Obama supporter but I dislike the idea of taxing the entrepreneurs more to fund the lazy government workers So is that like a very mild dislike or something? Otherwise, that sentence makes zero sense.

Not really. Obama's foreign policy is better than the republicans and he genuinely cares about people so healthcare and welfare policies would be better, but his support base also consists of the unions, which I disagree with.

> but his support base also consists of the unions, which I disagree with

So it's OK for people to pool capital into companies and abuse workers, but it's not OK for workers to pool labor into unions to prevent it?

Re: Derek Sivers Renounces his US Citizenship

#122

Post by nirvana » Tue, May 08, 2012, 6:48 PM UTC

driverdan wrote: post #119

nirvana wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many americans don't seem to understand this because they've grown up in the US media bubble and were educated in US schools which don't tend to really accurately portray the rest of the world. Going out and living in other countries you find how impressively different things can be. For instance, an acquaintance of mine who is a medical doctor who treats terminally ill patients, had his life ruined (and is in jail n…

There's a lot more to this story you're not disclosing. The DEA doesn't just imprison someone overnight because "decided he was writing too many prescriptions".

I guess you're not aware of it, but my acquaintance is not the only one. Many doctors across the USA have been attacked this way.

Here's an article going back to 2003: http://www.opioids.com/offshorepharmacy/deapaindoc.html

Here's one on 2004: http://doctordeluca.com/wordpress/wod-pca/

Doctor's opinion from 2008: http://www.healthcentral.com/chronic-pain/c/91/46424/prescri...

A briefing to congress from 2004, contains many useful references: http://www.aapsonline.org/painman/paindocs2/libbystatement.p...

Doctors shirking their duty due to fear of persecution via prosecution: http://www.doctorgorrell.com/a-bad-time-to-be-a-chronic-pain...

Article about how the fear is causing doctors to resist adequate remedies: http://www.healthsearchonline.com/doctors-prescribing-pain-m...

The white house is calling it an "epidemic": http://www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp/

Re: Derek Sivers Renounces his US Citizenship

#123

Post by marshallp » Tue, May 08, 2012, 6:56 PM UTC

gnaritas wrote: post #121

marshallp wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. Obama's foreign policy is better than the republicans and he genuinely cares about people so healthcare and welfare policies would be better, but his support base also consists of the unions, which I disagree with.

> but his support base also consists of the unions, which I disagree with So it's OK for people to pool capital into companies and abuse workers, but it's not OK for workers to pool labor into unions to prevent it?

They're not the same. Unions are equivalent to crony capitalism (ie. regulations put in place to prevent competition), but most of what companies do is just free markets at work (which helps the consumer).

Re: Derek Sivers Renounces his US Citizenship

#124

Post by sjtgraham » Tue, May 08, 2012, 6:57 PM UTC

driverdan wrote: post #119

nirvana wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many americans don't seem to understand this because they've grown up in the US media bubble and were educated in US schools which don't tend to really accurately portray the rest of the world. Going out and living in other countries you find how impressively different things can be. For instance, an acquaintance of mine who is a medical doctor who treats terminally ill patients, had his life ruined (and is in jail n…

There's a lot more to this story you're not disclosing. The DEA doesn't just imprison someone overnight because "decided he was writing too many prescriptions".

Of course, at no point in history has someone been prosecuted by a government on trumped up charges.

Re: Derek Sivers Renounces his US Citizenship

#125

Post by sjtgraham » Tue, May 08, 2012, 7:01 PM UTC

run4yourlives wrote: post #102

cletus wrote: post #90

EDIT: 48 upvotes in an hour and this submission just jumped from top 10 to second page? WTF? Honestly, the US is the most invasive government in the "free" world I've had the misfortune to encounter. I can't think of another developed nation that is quite so overbearing when it comes to foreign income. US citizens who haven't been in the US for 40 years and work in other countries STILL need to report their income to…

Every country has requirements of its citizens. A lot force you to serve in the Armed Forces. The US doesn't do that. While I agree that the US isn't as welcoming as it once was and has always had an onerous tax code, for foreigners it is still a huge benefit to work and do business there. The funny thing is that Citizenship in the US has been essentially devalued by non-citizen working categories that have been deve…

Permanent Residents (Green Card holders) also have to pay tax on their worldwide income, even if they do not reside in the US.

Re: Derek Sivers Renounces his US Citizenship

#126

Post by noahc » Tue, May 08, 2012, 7:39 PM UTC

marshallp wrote: post #123

gnaritas wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but his support base also consists of the unions, which I disagree with So it's OK for people to pool capital into companies and abuse workers, but it's not OK for workers to pool labor into unions to prevent it?

They're not the same. Unions are equivalent to crony capitalism (ie. regulations put in place to prevent competition), but most of what companies do is just free markets at work (which helps the consumer).

How is a union a regulation? A union is a contractual obligation between workers that they will only work under certain conditions.

Re: Derek Sivers Renounces his US Citizenship

#127

Post by raintrees » Tue, May 08, 2012, 7:41 PM UTC

InclinedPlane wrote: post #118

dantheman wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It requires the use of force to redistribute weatlh. It also removes the price mechanism, thus robbing the people of information required to produce and evaluate.

What if we just gave everyone like vouchers or something that they could use to trade for whatever they wanted? Although, how do we encourage people to do work that's more important than other work? Or people who have skills that are in short supply? And how do we make sure that people don't hog the stuff that takes a lot more work to produce? Maybe if we gave people more vouchers if they worked in more difficult or…

Or (re)invented capitalism?

Vouchers == Church Indulgences == Dollars

Re: Derek Sivers Renounces his US Citizenship

#128

Post by noahc » Tue, May 08, 2012, 7:47 PM UTC

For those wondering about the Tax issue, I doubt that is the case because of: http://sivers.org/trust

He put the company into a charitable trust, which isn't ever taxed except for on what he receives from the trust, which is set to the lowest amount possible.

Re: Derek Sivers Renounces his US Citizenship

#129

Post by InclinedPlane » Tue, May 08, 2012, 7:50 PM UTC

raintrees wrote: post #127

InclinedPlane wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if we just gave everyone like vouchers or something that they could use to trade for whatever they wanted? Although, how do we encourage people to do work that's more important than other work? Or people who have skills that are in short supply? And how do we make sure that people don't hog the stuff that takes a lot more work to produce? Maybe if we gave people more vouchers if they worked in more difficult or…

Or (re)invented capitalism? Vouchers == Church Indulgences == Dollars

#cough#that'sthejokecaptainobvious#cough#

Re: Derek Sivers Renounces his US Citizenship

#130

Post by dalke » Tue, May 08, 2012, 7:53 PM UTC

jakeonthemove wrote: post #105

biomene wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what way is communism dangerous? I fail to see any inherent danger in a form of society that distributes its wealth evenly across its citizens.

What run4yourlives said. To put it simply - when all the wealth is equally spread, there is no incentive for anyone to do anything. If everyone is paid equally and has the same benefits, there's no point in working harder or smarter - you just do the bare minimum and be done with it. Let's take a capitalist factory: workers are paid $5 per assembled iPad. Those who want more money can assemble 100 iPads and make $500…

Wow. I do not recognize your description of factories, economics, or political systems. iPads are made in China, governed by the Communist Party of China. They have migrated from a planned economy to one of "socialism with Chinese characteristics." Is this a communist factory?

I think you are confusing a "planned economy" with "communism." But even then, there is nothing in the definition of a planned economy to say that all people in a certain position have the same daily wage. The Soviet union had an incentive system. For example, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09668134908409742 says "encourages the foremost collective farmers by means of adding extra labour-days."

You idealize the idea of the piece-rate system, without realizing that that's the system used in the Soviet Union during the Stalinist era. Read in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_reform_in_the_Soviet_Union... how the Khrushchev era reform movement pushed to move from a quota system to "standardising their wages and reducing their dependence on overtime or bonus payments."

From that page, "The piece-rate system led to an enormous level of bureaucracy and contributed to huge inefficiencies in Soviet industry. In addition, factory managers frequently manipulated the personal production quotas given to workers to prevent workers' wages from falling too low."

So it seem that your "capitalist factory" is using the same piece-system incentive system as used during the Soviet era, which is about as communist as you can get.

I also think you are confusing "capitalist" with "meritocracy." The US during the period of slavery was under laissez-faire capitalism, but quite obviously slaves did not enjoy the same benefits which you attribute to capitalism, and a slave working the same job, with the same abilities as a free man was unlikely to make the same rates.

You write "Obviously, the people who are happy with $100 per day are now pissed off, either because they don't want or simply can't work that hard." Or they might put their family life ahead of the company's bottom line and think that 40 hours of week is enough even if some people want to work 80 hour weeks.

Finally, you wrote "The only ones benefiting from communism are those who make the laws and control the factories/country." There's nothing unique to communism there. The same holds with capitalism. If only the richest 1% in a capitalist country make the laws and control the factories/country, then it's very likely that they are benefiting the most. The economic system and the form of government are not as strongly coupled as you suggest.