anti globalist, economically it’s just universally bad
Right… NAFTA was universally beloved and was never taken advantage of by unsavory political characters. I’m sure you have some very unkind words for Biden after he continued and expanded Trump’s trade war.[/s]
i guess we makin babies now
Perhaps it could be state funded? It worked for PBS for a time and it still mostly works for the BBC. Why not a browser? A truly independent steward for the open web is important and it doesn’t seem like Google is capable of that.
I own a 1080ti and there was recently a massive update to Allan Wake 2 that made it more playable on pascal GPUs. Digital foundry did a video on it: http://youtu.be/t-3PkRbeO8A
I don’t know of any current game that can’t run at least 1080p30fps on 1080ti. But of course my knowledge is not exhaustive.
I wouldn’t expect every “next-gen” game to get the same treatment as Alan Wake 2 going forward. But we’re 4 years into the generation and there has probably been less than 10 games that were built to take full advantage of modern console hardware. My 1080ti has got a few more good years in it.
Steamed hams except instead of Principal Seymour Skinner it’s Principal Steamour Skinner.
They were saying that nitter may continue to work with already existing guest accounts for up to 30 days. That was around the end of January? I haven’t heard of anyone finding a workaround to the end of guest accounts. I may be out of the loop though.
Edit: This is the GitHub thread about the end of Nitter, as of this edit it doesn’t seem like they haven’t found a work around. Apparently some instances will still work with an account but will probably be rate limited hard.
It’s hard but you can also perceive it as a bunch of 2d lines on a surface.
SearX isn’t maintained anymore, SearXNG is the meta-search engine that is still maintained.
Having it enabled by default is a pretty massive security hole. I preordered the raspberry pi 1 when it launched and I don’t remember SSH ever being enabled be default in their images. Where did you hear it was enabled by default?
Ok, how about people currently living through communism? 83% of Chinese people believe they live in a democracy, more than in the US. Chinese citizens are on average around 4 times wealthier than their parents. Millennials are the first generation in US history to be poorer than their parents. Most of the wealth in the US is held by boomers who lived through the tail end of new deal social democracy.
Do you also disregard these accounts by people who are currently living through communism? Or will you move the goal post again?
I haven’t used YouTube logged in since they force merged YouTube accounts with Google accounts. This make me a bit harder to track and my data slightly less valuable. I don’t like that my data will still being used to create an advertising profile even if I pay. If one of the features of YouTube premium was they would never sell any of my data across all Google services then I would be willing to pay for it.
I’m not on YouTube’s side. But, ultimately Youtube has the advantage here. You guys are talking about technical solutions to get YouTube to continue sending you videos. But, YouTube has the nuclear option in their back pocket. Enshitification, YouTube is one of the only platforms that still works well on the internet without an app or logging in. If they want to badly enough they’ll stop allowing people to use YouTube signed out and ban accounts that watch with Adblock enabled.
We need to work on building platforms that work outside of Google. I think the hardest question is how would that work with monetization for new/smaller creators.
This is why I almost never tip on my card and almost always tip in cash.
Foss licenses are copyleft, they bar individuals from enclosing the commons built by the collective for profit. Anarchism isn’t just letting people do whatever they want. Anarchism means against hierarchy. Having rules that prevent unjustified hierarchies from forming is entirely with in the bounds of anarchism. Including rules that prevent using copyright as a coercive hierarchy.
I used to be a right-libertarian when I was a teenager. I could have seen myself going down the fascist pipeline if I hadn’t been exposed to critiques of capitalism. It’s undeniable that there are problems with society now. We’re a capitalist society that’s been deregulating for decades and things have gotten worse. It’s obvious the problem wasn’t “lack of free-markets”. At this point you either have to reject social progressiveism as the problem or capitalism. Many of my friends chose the former I chose the later. Now everyone here on Lemmy is beating me up.
I just want people to have control over their own lives and a big part of people’s lives are their place of work.
I know perfectly well how progressive taxes work.
It’s very obviously that you do not.
The point of my original post was that most people making average wages will not necessarily pay more taxes if social services increase. If the taxes are progressive taxes that is definitionally true.
A progressive tax is a tax where the greatest tax burden falls on those with the greatest ability to pay the tax. That is typically on those making more than average.
A regressive tax is a tax where the greatest tax burden falls on those with the least ability to pay the tax. That is typically on those making less than average
You keep bringing up (often false or tenuous) examples of regressive taxes. There are examples of regressive taxes in Europe and elsewhere, I don’t dispute this. This does not undermine my point.
There are also examples in Europe and elsewhere where progressive taxes have been successfully implemented. My original post was pointing this fact out.
There is no point in moving on to any of my more complex points until you demonstrate that you comprehend this.
Do you understand why giving examples of regressive taxes in Europe does not undermine my position that taxes to pay for social services should be progressive?
Wealthy people own companies. Companies are perfect tool for accumulating wealth, since you can reinvest profits forever and pay income tax (corporate rate) only on stuff you intend to extract to your own name, which is usually not much compared to total amount of generated income.
Right… to get at that wealth through taxes you would need a wealth tax or a tax on corporate profits along with outlawing stock buy backs.
Private person, on the other hand, is taxed on whole income and may qualify for usually laughable deductions. Got huge bonus from your job at the end of the year and plan to get few months off work to “invest in yourself” and learn a new trade? Tough luck, buddy, you are “rich” now - welcome to higher tax bracket, government will take their cut first and let’s see what you’ll be able to afford with what’s left.
That’s not how a progressive taxes work. Under progressive tax you get taxed at a higher rate as you make more money, but only the amount above a certain threshold is taxed higher, you’re not going to receive less money because you make above a certain amount as you seem to be implying. It’s explained more fully in this short video. https://youtu.be/VJhsjUPDulw
In terms of reinvesting in yourself, yes there should be universal access to education. If you’re capable and desire to improve yourself through education that should be free and you should be paid to pursue that self improvement. A society made up of smarter people benefits us all, we should make that investment.
VAT is a scam to fuck people who have to spend their income for actual living. If you live paycheck to paycheck you’ll end up paying VAT on your whole income.
Agreed VAT is a regressive tax that taxes the poor more. We see 100% eye to eye here.
Wealthy people don’t get their income in salary, salary is for working class. Dividends, capital gains, royalties - in any jurisdiction it’s possible to find something which will be less severe than income tax, which is also often not progressive or capped at something like 20%.
Well, yes which is why I said I support sovereign wealth funds. That is the state owns portions of companies directly in the same way other shareholders do. This cuts out the wealthy people entirely. The State can then use dividends of that fund to invest in social services. It can also use it’s position as a shareholder to give working people better labor contracts.
Dividends, capital gains, royalties - in any jurisdiction it’s possible to find something which will be less severe than income tax, which is also often not progressive or capped at something like 20%.
So you support lowering incoming taxes and raising taxes on dividends, capital gains, royalties? Sound like a decent policy to me. Well this is something else to consider; its almost like its more complicated than my original sarcastic comment implied.
Social security contributions are easily bypassed by employing yourself as CEO for minimal salary. Boom - now you have same healthcare as people who have to pay great chunk of their whole paycheck for it.
Uhh… yeah we should close that loopholes, right? Even if we didn’t close that loophole I still think its a much better system for healthcare than in the US.
If we restrict ourselves to EU citizens and your particular country is really anal or maybe 20% or something tax is too much for you anyway - you are free to move to Cyprus, Malta or Switzerland, which will have 0% capital gains if you meet not too tough conditions. Or “move”, you just have to get a residence there to declare as your primary one and be present at least sometimes - there’s no border control, it’s really hard to track if you spent there more than half a year for tax residency purposes, this is usually a matter of long legal battles and you won’t even get into that territory if you’re not doing anything too bizarre.
Not all that familiar with these kinds of tax dodging schemes within in the EU. But US corporations do similar things with the Cayman Islands. We could probably close these loopholes with enough political will. But again the easier and cleaner solution is a sovereign wealth fund which I mentioned in my first comment responding to you and you have not yet acknowledged as a way of raising funds.
I’m living and doing business in EU and it took me quite a lot of time to get from nothing into the position where I can utilize at least some of the benefits of the above - but you have to be completely fucking blind to not see that it’s rigged and tax burden on people who don’t try to game the system is completely disproportional.
Perhaps that is how things are but how should things be?
^This is what the law and order crowed says when the law is for wealthy and powerful people.
Honestly, I was being a bit facetious by responding to an overly simplistic comment in an overly simplistic way. Personally, I think we should fund universal welfare programs by cutting out the ultra-wealthy middle man with a sovereign wealth fund like they do in Norway. No need to tax the ultra-wealthy if they don’t exist because they can’t extract the wealth from the people in the first place.
It is weird that your comment was removed.
Right this is the contradiction I was poking fun at.
Personally, I prefer the carrot to the stick approach. I think we should do more stuff like the chips act and less stuff like tariffs. This is especially true in the context of technology that aids in the transition to an economy that uses less fossil fuels. The ~$10,000 Chinese EVs would be a pretty massive tool in that arsenal. (Though not as good of a tool as they are in China because of China’s genuinely impressive rail system.) If you want more American made EVs —cool so do I— but we will get there faster with the right industrial policy. The tariffs do little to make that happen.