Earlier quoted context omitted.
An Indian American man deserved to be smashed in the back of the head with a hammer?
I haven't heard about this. What's the story here?
Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics
331–340 of 362 posts
Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics
#332Earlier quoted context omitted.
An Indian American man deserved to be smashed in the back of the head with a hammer?
When was this??
Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics
#333Earlier quoted context omitted.
An Indian American man deserved to be smashed in the back of the head with a hammer?
https://www.ndtv.com/indians-abroad/indian-student-25-killed... Weird tangent, but anyways: tax the rich. Tan isn't exactly non-violet either, so more confused on the tangent: >He once tweeted that seven of the city’s supervisors — all progressives — should “die slow, motherfuckers” in a late-night polemic. The tweet, which Tan said was a joke, prompted hateful mail and police reports.
Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
An Indian American man deserved to be smashed in the back of the head with a hammer?
What does this have to do with Garry Tan and CA, it happened in Georgia?
Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics
#335Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Voting should be done without anonymity..." This is a spectacularly bad idea.
Why is it a bad idea? Can you describe one bad consequence of it, if it is implemented in combination with the other ideas above?
First, how about if you show that you've spent more than five seconds thinking about why every democratic country on earth uses secret ballots? Why are secret ballots codified in both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights?
There are other parts of your scheme that are also spectacularly bad ideas, but let's just deal with this one for now.
Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
> America was already taxing wealthy through the teeth years ago Except they weren’t. Those lovely 90% tax rates from the 1950s everyone on Reddit loves to bring up weren’t really paid by anyone. The effective tax rate paid after the loopholes and deductions was much lower, closer to 40%
let's make _effective tax rate_ 40% then...
It's already 37% (for Federal). Add in another 14% for California and its over 50%.
But even for simplicity sake, going to 40% would be far better and more practical than confiscating 5% of total assets and net worth.
Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, this is truly a pathetic mindset. There is more to the world than making "value." No one dies thinking "I wish I made more value." Absolutely pathetic, much like them.
Exactly. Also it's not the "billionaires" who are "making value". They are lousy at making anything. It's the workers (engineers, farmers, factory workers) that "make". The billionaires are just good at "capturing" value, and not giving back the rightfully owned share by the people. They are leeches
"engineers, farmers, factory workers" can just enter a co-op and sell the goods cheaper while still enjoying a slightly higher wage if the billionaires really aren't contributing anything. Seems like if what you say is true, in a free market billionaires would be forced out of business because they could not compete.
Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
it is not separate, it is exactly the same discussion. if you currently can use “unrealized” shit to borrow against than it is perfectly fair for you to pay the taxes on that shit. it is absolutely not a “separate discussion”
I support some sort of disincentive to prevent HNW individuals from borrowing against assets for income. I do not support wealth taxes or taxing unrealized gains (unless you get rebates for unrealized losses lol) There SHOULD be some mechanism (idk what) to close the loophole of HNW individuals borrowing against an asset you have not sold to minimize actual income, but that doesn't mean its right, effective, or even…
it is not a separate discussion because - at present - there is no such thing as “unrealized gains”
- they are all realized and have always been. now we just want to tax it.
Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
No we shouldn't be "glad that people can become billionaire". We should be glad that people can get reasonable wealthy, say, $100M net worth would be more than plenty, and would ensure that: people who worked hard got a lot ($100M!!), but nobody alone or in very small numbers can try to destroy the fabric of society Is that hard for you to understand? The fact that at your age you're still mistaking "generating billi…
I'm not glad they can become billionaires for their sake. I'm glad they can become billionaires for your and my sake, under the ideal I proposed, which is that billionaires can become that way only by entering into transactions where all sides are better off for doing so.
Because you fail to understand how economy and the world works. No, they don't "only do so by entering into transactions where all sides are better off", that's just a convenient fiction for people like you who never thought about the economic realities
The truth is they are abusing a system and rigging the laws, in order to keep extracting as much as they can. If it was really a "better for everyone", why don't you think all Starbuck's barista would be "overjoyed" of going to work every day? Think for yourself one minute instead of repeating talking points from FoxNews that you never even considered for one minute
Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not glad they can become billionaires for their sake. I'm glad they can become billionaires for your and my sake, under the ideal I proposed, which is that billionaires can become that way only by entering into transactions where all sides are better off for doing so.
Because you fail to understand how economy and the world works. No, they don't "only do so by entering into transactions where all sides are better off", that's just a convenient fiction for people like you who never thought about the economic realities The truth is they are abusing a system and rigging the laws, in order to keep extracting as much as they can. If it was really a "better for everyone", why don't you…
Oh I understand how it works. That's why I agreed many of them deserve to be at the Hague.
Remember, I said, ideal I proposed -- the ideal of the free market, where they can only become billionaires by entering voluntary transactions without externality to others. Under such ideal, if someone is a billionaire, it's because everyone is better off.
There have been varying shades of gray for how these play out in reality, the least shaded ones I'm generally grateful for and the most shaded ones are outright criminals that should have their fortune seized and put behind bars.