The worst possible antitrust outcome

> Ok, that might be the case. But these are the words my dictionary gave me.

Please provide a link to this dictionary.

> What do you think are the right words for stuff that e.g. needs to be payed to the government a) to regulate the market

People generally don't pay the government to regulate the market directly.

If you're talking about payment for permit approvals and things like that, most people would call it a fee.

If you're talking about the taxes associated with certain financial transactions or approval to import an item into the country, those are often called duty.

> b) to provide an income to the government?

Taxes.

> Please provide a link to this dictionary.

    $ apt show dict-freedict-deu-eng 
    Package: dict-freedict-deu-eng
    Version: 2021.01.05-3
    Priority: optional
    Section: text
    Source: freedict
    Maintainer: Sebastian Humenda 
    Installed-Size: 25.3 MB
    Provides: dictd-dictionary
    Suggests: dictd | dicod, dict | kdict | gnome-dictionary | goldendict
    Homepage: https://freedict.org/
    Tag: culture::TODO, culture::german, made-of::dictionary, role::app-data,
     role::program, use::converting
    Download-Size: 17.7 MB
    APT-Manual-Installed: yes
    APT-Sources: http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Packages
    Description: German-English dictionary for the dict server/client
     This is the German-English dictionary from the FreeDict project. It contains
     463244 headwords (FreeDict status: stable). It can be either used with the
     dictd server and a dict client or with GoldenDict.

I thought "taxes" is the English equivalent to the German "Steuern". A "Steuer" is definitely a thing to regulate inefficiencies due to external costs.

> People generally don't pay the government to regulate the market directly.

Huh, that's basic government behaviour. How do you call the mechanism of the government imposing money to pay to the state in order to internalize external costs?

Alcohol causes sickness -> tax on Alcohol, cigarettes -> tax on cigarettes, car usage wears roads down -> tax on fuel, car usage causes congestion -> fees for car usage, CO2 causes climate change -> tax on CO2, income causes wealth imbalance -> tax on income, land ownership causes inefficient land usage -> tax on land ownership, high frequency trading causes energy waste -> tax on high frequency trade, foreign products cause local unemployment -> tariffs, ... . The list is endless, because it includes every "tax".

At least that's what they told me in basic economics class. But then again I'm maybe mistranslating "Steuern". The German term for b) is called "Abgaben" which I thought would mean "duties".

> The racist, segregation-forever southern Democrats, who as powerful committee chairs had blocked civil-rights legislation for decades — mostly died off or became Republicans in the 1970s and 1980s thanks to the GOP's "Southern Strategy."

Why would racists mad about Democrats supporting the Civil Rights Act of 1964 respond by switching to the party that had pushed through every other Civil Rights Act before it? Of course, they didn't. Of the 21 Democrat Senators who had opposed the Civil Rights Act, just one became a Republican.

The landslide GOP wins in 1972, 1980, 1984, and 1988 obscure subsequent trends, but in 1976, Carter still won the usual southern states. Even in 1980, a generation after the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Reagan won New York by a larger margin than he won Alabama and South Carolina.

Southern realignment was driven by economic development. The south voted democrat in 1950 for the same reason black people did: because they were poor and Democrats were the New Deal party. In 1950 Illinois's pre capita income was double that of Alabama: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/release/tables?eid=257197&od=195.... Staring in the 1960s, the south experienced rapid urbanization and economic development (the "New South"). The south's competitive advantage against the north was lower taxes, lower regulation, and Right to Work laws--all Republican policies. By 1990, Illinois's per capita income was only 33% higher than Alabama.

This is clearer by looking at Virginia--the Capital of the Confederacy. Virginia was part of the Solid South in the early 20th century. It voted for FDR by more than double the national margin in 1944. But by 1960, Virginia was pretty reliably Republican, voting for Nixon in 1960 over JFK (even though JFK won deep south states like Georgia by 25 points). You can't explain Virginia's flip by pointing to racial politics. The reason it flipped was because Virginia industrialized earlier than the other southern states. In 1950, Virginia's per-capita income was already halfway between Alabama and Illinois. In 1970, Illinois was only 10% ahead of Virginia, but was still 50% ahead of Alabama. The other southern states followed the same GOP shift, they just did so decades later because their economies industrialized decades after Virginia's.

The "southern strategy" narrative is a tremendous example of white people's gullibility when it comes to race issues. It's based almost entirely on one 1981 interview with Lee Atwater, who didn't even work on the Nixon campaign, or on Reagan's 1980 campaign. And it's based on a premise that's simply absurd if you think about it for a minute. The south flocked to republicans in the 1980s to punish democrats for a law that Democrats had voted for in 1964 (but which Republicans had voted for by an even larger margin)--nevermind the fact that, during this time, the south built an economy on siphoning jobs from blue states through business-friendly GOP policies. Also ignore the fact that the major issue in the 1970s and 1980s when all this was happening was the threat of the communist, atheist Soviet Union, where southerners naturally fit into the GOP bloc.

Can Elon Musk confiscate your property, limit your freedom of movement, or outright kill you?

There were times in history where having a lot of money was correlated to having all those powers. There are places in this world where that’s still the case.

Seams like I'm wrong about the general term, which is weird since they tell that definition in several courses in my university. Part of the confusion is maybe that "Steuern" literally means "steerings".

I've found the term that I'm looking for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steering_tax . It's a bit weird, that most examples there seem to be from Germany or Switzerland. Maybe we just like that concept. But Piguo was a Brit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigouvian_tax

> but there are a number of misunderstandings in the rest of your post that I don't think I'm going to be able to explain.

Too bad.

> You're also just inventing reasons for taxes in many cases

Most of these are also listed as examples in the Wikipedia articles, the other are very much the official reasoning for these taxes, so I don't agree with that. Of course the government doesn't mind taking some money.