631–640 of 736 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
You’re proving the point. None of this is rational discourse. “you’re a criminal”, “ you’re a slave”, “you’re a crab”. We get it, you don’t like paying taxes. > The only purpose of your meager existence is to make your owners more wealthy and powerful. Are these the wealthy and powerful pot smokers you’re talking about?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s plenty of things that are valuable for society while still not having significant financial value.
One of the really cool things about capitalism is that you can, directly or indirectly, put financial value on pretty much anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don’t think it would be possible without the tax exemption. Maybe it shouldn't be possible. Society is telling your friend that her work is not particularly valuable and that she should probably consider doing something else.
There’s plenty of things that are valuable for society while still not having significant financial value.
There are some pretty revealing comments here. People seem to think only money has value. Then there are people who see art only as a rich person's pursuit. It can be, but it doesn't need to be. I am reminded of Daniel James also known as Gwyrosydd, his bardic name. He was a Welsh language poet, who wrote probably the greatest Welsh language song, Calon Lân (means 'a pure heart'). People throughout Wales sing this so…
> I like to imagine what they could have done had they been at leisure to work and perform all day. Probably nothing. The idle rich and trust fund kids aren’t exactly know for producing, well, anything of value, really. Getting paid to sit around all day and do fuck-all isn’t exactly character building.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Independent_scientist... - "An independent scientist (formerly called a gentlemen scientist) is a scientist with a private income who can pursue scientific study independently as they wish without excessive external financial pressures."
Including: Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin (Evolution), Ben Franklin, Robert Boyle (Boyle's gas law), Oliver Heaviside (electromagnetic theory, co-axial cables), Alexander von Humboldt (established modern Geography), Thomas Jefferson, Leopold Kronecker, Alessandro Volta (voltaic pile battery)
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_scientist - "Self-funded scientists practiced more commonly from the Renaissance until the late 19th century, including the Victorian era, especially in England, before large-scale government and corporate funding was available. Many early fellows of the Royal Society in London were independent scientists. "
Including "Charles Babbage, Henry Cavendish (discovered Hydrogen), Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, Thomas Young (Young's modulus of elasticity, eyeball focusing), Joseph Priestly (discovered oxygen)
Rene Decartes "arrived in La Haye in 1623, selling all of his property to invest in bonds, which provided a comfortable income for the rest of his life."
And basically any tenured professor paid to do whatever interests them, or academic or researcher, especially mathemticians, hired and paid for blue sky research, all the places like Bell Labs that HN loves.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you happen to have a link to that?
I do. Do you have the money to pay me to research it for you? I shouldn't hurt my potential income like this, but the link is even mentioned elsewhere itt.
A novel treatment for the proverbial dying man. I understand that this program is currently assigned at random but it’s prudent to assume that they’ll shift to a “merit based” system before long i.e. sweetheart deals for members of the right clique, nepotism, and the occasional worthwhile project. For concrete examples, look no further than the content funded and produced by the national broadcaster, RTE. Aside from…
There is already a "Merit based" system that supports the arts. It's called the private market.
My initial gut reaction was akin to many responses here but a post that detailed the implementation mitigates many concerns I'd have if I were an Irish citizen. As long as the system has some required 'buy-in' from applicants to prove they are working towards being an artist, and the distribution is random so it's not a guaranteed payout, and possibly the odds of being selected are driven by the number of applicants and so no one could do a cost-benefit analysis of submitting the 'buy-in' purely with hope of receiving a payout, then this seems to be a more fair way of supporting up and coming 'arts' than the government paying some already established artist for a mural or to design a park or to create a sculpture.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I also wonder why the tax payers who care can’t contribute directly to a fund, and keep government out of entirely.
Because we use taxes as a process to crowdsource funding more effectively. That's literally the entire basis for it. Might as well ask why "only the taxpayers who care about a new highway can raise funds to buy it" and then we're back in some weird, system of no central government because someone can always claim "why not just like, let people donate money" because it's a simplistic cliche that appeals deeply to peop…
Is this passive aggressive insult really necessary?
> Because we use taxes as a process to crowdsource funding more effectively
I’m sure you will agree that not everything that everybody wants can get funded. The debate here is how to draw the line.
I think critical shared physical infrastructure occupying a limited valuable resource is nothing like art, so I’m struggling to follow your argument.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I live in a fairly expensive city in the UK. Working minimum wage for 2 weeks will pay for a room in a flat share, plus my households food and required bills. It’s not much of a life but the same still stands in many cities.
That's what, £1100 per month? How can you survive on that in an expensive city?
If you go to Liverpool (which significantly punches for musical history), it’s actually manageable on 20hr/weeek minimum wage.
You’re not talking sustaining a family or anything, but that life has been gone for 40 years at this point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Corporations produce things (productive), while UBI rewards unproductive behavior (theoretically)
people working for corporations produce things, I think you'll find the incorporating docs, and the property owned do not produce things by themselves.