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. danbruc · 1790865207 · focus · HN ↗

      It is perfectly fine to be upset about certain lawful behaviors because lawful does not mean good. This does also not exclusively apply to companies, people can be law abiding assholes. And it works in the other direction, too, sometimes unlawful behavior is good behavior.

      1. jvanderbot · 1790865984 · focus · HN ↗

         But GP comment is not about how you feel about it. It is about where you direct that anger. If you dislike what a powerful entity does, well, we the people are supposed to have a recourse in our representatives. Why precisely is it that we feel like we do not?

         1. danbruc · 1790866807 · focus · HN ↗

            I expect everyone to behave nicely even in the absence of laws. The reason that I am not killing people left and right is not because it is illegal to so but because it is immoral. The law is a last resort to disincentivize certain behaviors or hold you responsible after the fact, it is not what should exclusively guide anyone's behavior.

            1. parineum · 1790867953 · focus · HN ↗

               > The reason that I am not killing people left and right is not because it is illegal to so but because it is immoral.

               And if it wasn't illegal, some immoral entity would outcompete you by killing all of their rivals (including you).

               The whole point of the law is to standardize morals so immoral actors don't gain advantage.

               1. mind-blight · 1790871028 · focus · HN ↗

                  Not necessarily. Humans aren't really capable of living entirely solo. We rely on a society - even a small tribe - to provide resources that we struggle to make. We evolved for tribes and tribalism to support our survival.

                  People who commit murder wantonly are generally untrusted and/or shunned. Being banished is really dangerous, so people tend not to go on more killing sprees even without formal laws

                  1. TeMPOraL · 1790874079 · focus · HN ↗

                     All true, but you look at it from the wrong angle.

                     Yes, people are naturally social and naturally enforce social norms. But this natural ability doesn't scale beyond a tribe (see also: Dunbar's numbers). Our natural social patterns only work when everyone in the group knows everyone else and they all interact frequenlty.

                     Laws didn't invent morality or punishing antisocial behavior. Laws are what allows them to scale and support societies of millions, where most of your daily interactions are with strangers you'll probably never again see in your life.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.