Tax Cuts: Good or Nah?

Question, what do you feel is society’s best way of hedging against the worst of us?

Because humans don’t always do the right thing and have to be compelled to do so. Which is why we have government provided courts with the authorization to haul you into court, and also government ownership and control of intercontinental ballistic missiles. Some things needs to have layer of insulation from purely private motives.

2 Likes

By other human beings that already hold a monopoly of force?

The same government that gave us the Dredd Scott decision, the same government that passed Jim Crow laws, the same government that drove the Native American population nearly to extinction, etc…?

I don’t have a problem with that in theory or, generally, practice (depending on the specifics of course). I only posted the question because using the government, which is run by people, often power hungry people, to hedge against the worst of “human nature” seems nonsensical at best to me.

The best way? I donno, that’s not exactly an easy question to answer. I think opportunity is the great equalizer, in that, the more opportunity that exists will more likely produce better outcomes resulting in less of “the worst of us”.

All I know is that if my company didn’t keep our consumers happy we would cease to exist and it’s from that perspective that company’s make a profit. I’m also confident the vast majority of companies operate this way. Like >99%…

Also, re-election doesn’t seem like a particularly big concern… http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-18/79-members-congress-have-been-office-least-20-years

As far as ISPs go, a lot of consumers don’t have a choice because local governments/municipalities sign exclusivity agreements with a provider. I.e. it’s not the companies, it’s the governments.

But, what do I know, I just want to kick granny out of her Medicaid paid retirement home.

I think you guys are fighting the troll attempt too hard. @NickViar asked how doesn’t government protect us from human nature. Government is filled with humans. When you give government authority to fix problems you always create new ones (because fallible humans and agency problems).
Sometimes the new problems are more socially acceptable, sometimes they aren’t. Depends on your perspective.

Yep. You’re not going full anarchist on me, are you? :wink:

Yep, yep, yep, and yep.

But you can’t make Perfect the enemy of Good. It isn’t the people in government per se (though it should be more than it is), but rather the institutional benefits.

Back to the thread topic. Market is liking the tax bill out of the Senate, which means it must eat the poor (kidding). Not sure why tech stocks slid on less corporate taxes. Are investors worried they’ll hoard even more cash?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-03/dollar-gains-with-focus-on-tax-reform-flynn-drama-markets-wrap

Oh, not me. I ignore basically everything Nick posts.

And I don’t disagree with what you wrote, which is why its important to place some limits on government. But unquestionably the government serves as a hedge on certain human nature - that’s been its point since the invention of the concept.

1 Like

I saw some argument online around this a couple days ago that lower tax rates help afford more manpower which makes automation and various tech roles less cost efficient. Not sure whether or not I agree with it yet, but it doesn’t seem super farfetched at face value.

Lol, I’m no anarchist or even Libertarian. I just trust smaller entities and choice over additional power in the hands of an already overpowered central government.

1 Like

You mean like when monarchs ruled via divine right or just the concept of our constitutional republic when the majority could own the minority?

1 Like

I did?

This was during an exchange b/t you and @pfury over faith in humanity and government as a hedge against human nature.

I was just hoping he would explain why only the monopolies that control other(lesser) monopolies deserve support.

Because they have more weapons. /argument

Try Reagan for size. How much did the debt/deficit go up during his time?

I do believe that’s the gist of it, but I always enjoy watching them attempt to argue from a point of perceived moral superiority. Every intervention offers improvement…except, of course, for the ones that don’t. The majority decides what is right…except for slavery and Jim Crow. We can pretty much just forget all about some other things…right, @thefourthruffian?

Well, certainly with the idea of the constitutional republic. Don’t forget that things like the BOR are, too, hedges against human nature. If men were angels, pace Madison, we’d have no need for government.

2 Likes

Sure. It’s kind of ironic you bring up the BOR, though, considering it protects the people from the federal government.

Sorry, not following the thread, so I have no idea what you are talking about.

I don’t think that’s ironic - people need to be protected from the federal government. State government, too. And obtrusive private power, too.