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

Buy, Borrow, Die – Explained

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 504 posts

Re: Buy, Borrow, Die – Explained

#411

Post by xorcist »

valval wrote: post #396
T4iga wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fulfilling your obligation to a society that brought you riches, however much risk you took and however much hard work vs luck that was, is not theft. Fueling that society, so that it can persist for your well-being is your obligation as a citizen. If you fully play out your argument, the least wealthy and least successful deserve it the most to have their remaining wealth taken because they are not assuming any risk…

The line of thinking we’re trying to get across to you here is best put like this I find; even if 99% of the village thinks it’s a good idea to march into the most productive individual’s house and rob it clean, it doesn’t become morally right to do so.

Even if that individual moved into the village knowing perfectly well that this is the rule in this village?

It is not unreasonable to me that you have to pitch in for common goods if you live in a village, and should you refuse to take part in this you might find yourself in a situation where you have to either move out of the village or forfeit your share.

Re: Buy, Borrow, Die – Explained

#412

Post by paulryanrogers »

infinitifall wrote: post #327
paulryanrogers wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if the government provides you (and society) no services.

Even assuming a perfectly efficient government with good intentions, you should not expect to benefit from more than a fraction of your tax money if you are above median income.

Thankfully the government doesn't only serve me, but rather all of society and its diverse fundamental needs.

Re: Buy, Borrow, Die – Explained

#413

Post by paulryanrogers »

rmbyrro wrote: post #399
paulryanrogers wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if you use the savings to change the government to be more humane.

I'm not in favor of telling people what to do, in general. As long as what they're doing doesn't cause undue harm to others, it's better than what most governments do nowadays.

We have very different definitions of what is "a favor to society".

Re: Buy, Borrow, Die – Explained

#414

Post by nerdponx »

zb1plus wrote: post #292
nerdponx wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(conts) infrastructure upkeep, managing various natural resources, emergency management, weather reporting/forecasting/research, economic reporting/research... There are so many valuable services provided by the US federal government. People just take it all for granted.

I've always said people should be able to directly allocate where their taxes go within the government expenditures, or be able to file an objection based on religious or philosophical beliefs to having their tax dollars fund morally objectionable things. I would be much happier to pay taxes if they went to funding schools, infrastructure, NASA, emergency management, poverty relief and other useful things instead of…

That always sounds nice until you see how it plays out in universities and other charities. The directed donations don't get sent to where they are most needed; they end up funding large vanity projects.

Re: Buy, Borrow, Die – Explained

#415

Post by paulryanrogers »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #378
paulryanrogers wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rule of Capitalism? The rule of monopoly? The rule of feudalism? Greed isn't exclusive to to systems of government.

You're just listing different kinds of bureaucracies. The principal difference with capitalism is that there isn't supposed to be any constraint on everyone trying to do it, and then competition prevents any one entity from absorbing all the resources. This, of course, doesn't work if the incumbents capture the government and pass regulations that constrain the competition which is supposed to be keeping them in chec…

Indeed, so capitalism in its purest, unbridled form has the same flaw: it becomes all consuming. Hence the need for regulation, another form of bureaucracy.

Re: Buy, Borrow, Die – Explained

#416

Post by paulryanrogers »

smsm42 wrote: post #290
paulryanrogers wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right but why go so far? Until you become like Buffett, surprised to pay less than ones secretary.

> surprised to pay less than ones secretary. I don't think this is actually true. It's a nice rhetorical soundbite, but if you count properly (e.g. all taxes all assets owned by Buffett actually pay) there's no way he pays less unless his secretary is extremely exceptional for some reason. It is true that her tax structure is probably different from Buffett's, so if you creatively form your query so that taxes that B…

I don't think the quote is meant in absolute dollars, but rather the percentage of her income and assets.

Re: Buy, Borrow, Die – Explained

#417

Post by littlestymaar »

throwaway22032 wrote: post #260
littlestymaar wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most people try to minimize taxes No, most people don't care about their tax the way wealthy people do. I ended up in a wealthy family through marriage and I can tell you nobody I my original social circle spent even a fraction of the effort the wealthy do when it comes to taxes.

It's always funny to read this sort of thing because it's like you're so close to connecting the dots but don't quite get it. Is it not entirely logical that a cohort that actually pays attention to where 20%, 30%, 40% of their money is going ends up wealthier than one that doesn't?

> Is it not entirely logical that a cohort that actually pays attention to where 20%, 30%, 40% of their money is going ends up wealthier than one that doesn't?

Many if not most rich never got rich, they happened to be born rich. In the situation I'm talking about, the said family has been wealthy for two centuries. And my in-laws are significantly less well-off than the generation before. Their ancestors may have been gifted in some way that got them rich in the first place, but there have definitely be some regression to average since then and their management of their wealth has been much less efficient than the one of my parents for instance (who aren't wealthy today, but are still clearly better than their own parents).

In fact I suspect that these people are obsessed about taxes because they know their fortune is ever going downhill because they lack the thing that made their ancestors successful so they spend their efforts trying to salvage their wealth instead of making one of their own.

Re: Buy, Borrow, Die – Explained

#418

Post by moogly »

yuvadam wrote: post #104
w4 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How odd. This is a rather interesting catch, especially in light of the upcoming tax fight in 2025 with the TCJA and Expanded Child Tax Credit expirations, and the unrealized capitals gains tax proposals. Given the other comments pointing to the SEO benefits of creating a subreddit just for a single post, it has shades of an effort to seed the information space and shape the narrative in advance of the tax fight by g…

It's mainly just a really bizzare post, super interesting and informative, but why would anyone in that position go into the trouble of typing up that amount of detail and post it in a brand new subreddit?

To sleep better at night, perhaps.

Re: Buy, Borrow, Die – Explained

#419

Post by aguaviva »

valval wrote: post #394
Propelloni wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Supporting the war in Ukraine is just another example of “bombing brown people”, yet you appear completely oblivious. How? Russia invades the Ukraine. Ukraine defends itself. Ukraine's allies, incl. the USA, send weapons. None of the allies, incl. the USA, fight in Ukraine or Russia. I'm afraid your independent thinking has formed a prejudiced opinion. George Carlin would not be proud.

Of course this time around we have to do the bombing through some middlemen because the brown people have big guns too, and the people aren’t actually brown this time around. They do speak a weird language though and have different cultural values, so maybe that qualifies. Ukraine isn’t our ally. That’s a silly sentiment. Ukraine is a developing country wholly comparable to say Zambia or Namibia. Our interests just h…

Ukraine is a developing country wholly comparable to say Zambia or Namibia.

Ukraine is a highly developed country, in some ways more than the U.S. Its people are certainly way more educated, on average.

If you can't get that part right, then I doubt you have much to tell us about the context of the war or whether Ukraine is an ally or not.

Re: Buy, Borrow, Die – Explained

#420

Post by bko »

TrackerFF wrote: post #85

It always puzzled me how tax-adverse some wealthy people are. I'm not talking about the wealthy people that have 100% of their wealth tied up to company (stock) that they operate - but the wealthy people that are just asset-rich, with zero operational duties. Their wealth is handled by wealth managers, they probably don't even know what they own. But minimizing taxes and hoarding wealth is priority number 1.

I think most extremely wealthy people have a concentrated holding in a business they created or inherited.

The bill gates example where someone has 100 billion in sp500 is rare. You don't get insanely rich through diversification

Post reply on HN