No, according to the poster, this post was removed from r/NCD (on Reddit).

No, it’s just a fundamental, inescapable fact of your voting system that voting for a candidate that won’t win, instead of voting for the candidate who might win and you’d prefer over the other most likely candidate, is a vote for the candidate you’d prefer less.

Please look up the spoiler effect earnestly (cgpgrey has a passable video on the topic). It’s not the voters fault they’re forced into voting for candidates that aren’t their favourite, it’s the voting system’s fault.

Edit for your convenience: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE

As a citizen of one of the US’s vassal states, I can’t vote, but this shit affects us all, as the US is the world overlord. A trump presidency would be devastating, in my point of view.

Please fucking vote for the Dems if you’d prefer them over the Republicans. Please learn how your terrible system actually works. This vassal begs you.

Oh and campaign to improve the voting system so you can actually vote for the candidates you like best.

Why yes, let perfect be the enemy of good.

While yes, Australia’s voting system still is not great (single member electorates), and inequality is still bad, and we’re capitalist like the US, it’s sure as hell no where near as bad here, and I would argue, partially due to our better elections (it’s not even close).

We have pretty good worker protections, healthcare that’s not ridiculously expensive (though, we’re working on it…), and overall much better social programs.

I would be surprised if our voting system had nothing to do with that.

FPTP is trash, it’s basically only gets bette for any other system (hyperbole, but not by much).

Got about half way through this, yikes. I thought their pricing was already a bit steep per search, but considering the company decisions, it does not fill you with confidence.

I will reiterate, that this back-of-the-napkin idea only works with other policies to stabilise house prices. Because yeah, right now, it wouldn’t make sense. Would need to be phased in over a long-time (certainly taxing people now on capital gains since they moved in decades ago would be entirely unfair).

Though, it still rubs me the wrong way currently that the haves are getting a way better deal than the have nots. Again, in theory, you could sell up and put yourself in the same position as someone who can’t afford a house, by renting, and have a bunch of capital gains tax free, whereas they have to pay a higher tax rate on their total income - that is the normal tax rates - even though they’re poorer. Seems unfair (but I’m not suggesting the fix is immediately taxing capital gains on owner occupiers).

Canberra seems to have a few good rental laws then, as last I heard rent increases are capped at 2% beyond inflation. Which at least means they haven’t had the stupid rental increases all the othe cities have seen the last few years.

Yes. Because we’ve made housing a viable investment, it keeps going up beyond inflation, so that currently you do need all the money from selling a house, including what’s way above inflation on average, to be able to afford another. It’s stupid, and eventually it’s gonna break. I agree though, it’s currently required to not tax captial gains on somewhere you live, else you’ll get priced out.

In an idealised world, though, where we progressively stabilise housing prices, I would propose you get taxed on your capital gain, even if you live there, perhaps only on the gain above inflation, and be still able to buy a similar property with the money left over because the house prices wouldn’t be going up by stupid amount every year.

I get where you’re coming from, and perhaps I didn’t include this nuance before: I want all capital gains taxed, including the place you live in, precisely to stop making housing “a good investment”.

I should say then, I just don’t think it’s terribly fair on people who can’t afford somewhere to own, because those who are in, get favourable tax relief. Someone worked for 10 years and made $600,000? Yeah, have fun getting taxed the normal amount, while those who own housing may have made a couple hundred grand in the same time and get taxed nothing. As an individual, sure, you’re no better off if you buy another house, but you have the option of not buying another house and doing something else with the money tax free. A worker just get taxed and has no choice.

I think all captial gains should be taxed the same as income, with special provisions for housing to get good overall outcomes for inequality and the individual also. But not zero just because you lived in the house.

I just think zero captial gains on housing you live in isn’t ideal either. Averaging the gain across the time you held it, at your tax bracket for each year, seems fairer (in a world where we also use other methods to stabilise the housing market).

Simple maths (but made up) example: you’re in the 30% tax bracket every year (kept earning the same inflation equivalent amount of money). Let’s say your capital gain is $300,000 above what inflation was during 10 years. You then aportion that gain over ten years according to some lookup table which lists the inflation rate for each financial year, and whatever it bumps your tax bracket to that year, you owe that much on that portion per year.

If we pretend inflation was 2% every year, then we just back calculate the inflation adjusted, equal portion of tax across the 10 years.

So for a steady 2% per year it would be something like this:

So you pay 30% (or whatever it brings your tax bracket to) on the equal inflation adjusted 1/10th of the total gain above inflation.

The tax office can just make yearly lookup tables, or calculators, to assist with this.

If this example maths doesn’t make 100% sense, well whoops, this is back of the napkin brainstorming, but I think you can understand my intent.

Hope you enjoy this brainstorm lol

I’m sorry, NZ doesn’t have captial gains tax??? Thanks backwards as fuck.

I mean, over here in Australia we give a 50% discount, which is already bullshit in my opinion, for assets held for at least a year, and waived for primary residences under a certain value (which is also bullshit, in my opinion. You’d be getting taxed on the gain only, not sure why living there somehow makes that capital gain special), but no capital gains at all? That’s nuts.

Why howdy to you too 🐸🫱🎩

Not a lawyer, but something makes me doubt all the courts around the world would hold to this.

What country are you in? You may be entitled to a refund/replacement since you have the receipts

Luckily/unluckily (because effort), in Australia, consumer guarantees on length of time you can get a refund are vague.

E.g. it doesn’t matter that a fridge’s manufacturer warranty is only 2 years, you expect that to last longer.

With effort, you could probably get a fridge fixed like 5 years after purchase with some badgering / threatening small claims.

Bricking your product would probably fall under that category.

This is wild speculation, not a lawyer.

I just can’t imagine Trump using any technology whatsoever. I’m impressed he manages to send tweets off.

Naps are not recommended by sleep psychologists if you are someone who has trouble falling asleep at night anyway, unless you are extremely fatigued, and in those cases, the earlier in the day the better so you can recharge your sleep drive before night.

But yeah, I too wish I could give myself an actual refresh during the day with a siesta, but alas no.

I am not a sleep psychologist and this isn’t medical advice, second-hand info.

I feel like all public servants (including cops) ought to have public liability insurance, where money would end up coming from in these situations, which then the employer (police department, other department) needs to pay, the employee is aware of, and is part of their renumeration (i.e. the more their premiums cost, the less they’re making), making idiots more of a financial liability to themselves.

Quite quickly you’re going to have people acting as responsibly as possible if you’re insurance premiums then go up when you act like a moron.

Obviously this would require protections so that people don’t end up being screwed over by insurance premiums, but still, this seems to be an issue in public service all over the world, no consequences because the tax payer just ends up footing the settlement, and the public servant goes on their merry way.

I don’t like Tyson because I feel he preaches an inaccurate version of the scientific philosophy. So many times I hear him saying things along the lines of absolute certainty, because it’s SCIENCE.

Where, we of the true faith, preach: the evidence indicates that this is the most likely to be true, or at least, this model makes predictions about the world more reliably than any other we currently have.

Amen.

Pretty soon that devine right of kings and thing is going to look laughable by comparison.

Kings were nowhere near this rich, or powerful.

While I know that these days, bugs in code can cause real-world harm (personal info leaks, superannuation records lost, lol google), I find it humorous to think of the equivalent, even worse outcomes in my discipline (chemical/process engineering).

“Didn’t do any checks, fuck it, I know this calculation is fire 🔥”

Later: 🔥🔥💥

The number of people he’s said he hates or called names because they’ve either supported the Harris campaign, or spoken against his, seems to be quite a lot.

Baffles me that anyone could look on and think, “hmm yes, this guy seems socially intelligent”, is beyond me.

Australian y’all user checking in. It’s not my fault there’s no plural you in English, and the local (uncommon) variant “yous” has uneducated associations. Which, of course is unfair, but such is language and society.

Anyway, thanks y’all, I’m going to keep using it.

How long do patents last for anyway? Pokemon being caught in balls must be many, many decades old by this point.