Thread

1. djoldman · 1790864377 · focus · HN ↗

   It often strikes me as quite the biased and one-sided take when a tax-paying entity is called out by the press for tax avoidance (NOT tax evasion, which is illegal). (yes TFA implies that Meta is breaking the law, I'm not talking about situations where entities break the law).

   Previously we've seen "The Secret IRS Files" from Propublica as well as other coverage of tax avoidance that never resulted in tax evasion charges. Coverage wide enough that it's arguably safe to assume that no laws were broken because there was quite the demand for an enforcement response.

   The funny thing is that a more accurate title for these pieces would be, "Federal Government Allows [tax-paying entity] a Massive Tax Break." And then the piece would be all about how the senate, congress, and president either explicitly wanted there to be this extreme tax loophole or was incompetent and allowed something they didn't mean to allow.

   Folks are continually getting upset and riled up about players in the economic system instead of who and what makes the rules.

   An analogous example: everyone got cranky about Martin Shkreli, mostly because he raised prices on Deraprim, although also because many would label him a brash jerk. But he went to jail for finance stuff, not raising prices. Why? Because raising prices in the way he did wasn't something the feds thought was illegal or wasn't something they thought he could be convicted of.

   Folks get mad at Musk, Zuckerberg, etc... if they're doing something illegal, ok yea that makes sense. If folks are mad about actions that are legal, it makes zero sense to be mad at the actor. Be mad at the people/entities who created the legal loopholes and laws.

   1. NikolaNovak · 1790866009 · focus · HN ↗

      I was with you, but no, this is where you lost me:

      "If folks are mad about actions that are legal, it makes zero sense to be mad at the actor."

      There are people with mindset "I will try to be an overall decent human being and maintain some awareness and empathy of others", and there are the "I will be as much of a selfish asshole as the legal system allows me to, and wreak untold damage in the endless game of whack-a-mole".

      I think in fact more of us should be gunning after the second kind :). To paraphrase you, It makes zero sense for me to be OK with fundamentally anti-social, anti-humanity humanoids.

      1. djoldman · 1790869493 · focus · HN ↗

         In relationships between people one interacts with directly, I agree: there are "social contracts" that aren't laws that people in the USA generally follow. Knowing about them and not following them makes someone a jerk.

         Wreaking "untold damage" sounds like something where a law should exist to prevent it unless there's some incredibly important counter benefit.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.