Skip Navigation

Dragon

@ Dragon @lemmy.ml

Posts
8
Comments
69
Joined
6 yr. ago

  • Hundreds of subreddits are considering banning all links to X

    Jump

  • I have less of an issue with individual communities banning certain links, I think an instance-wide ban on anything due to ideology is annoying. I can figure out that Nazis suck on my own, thank you.

  • Hundreds of subreddits are considering banning all links to X

    Jump

  • That kind of things is part of the reason I came to Lemmy.

  • Hundreds of subreddits are considering banning all links to X

    Jump

  • Are there other sites to which links are banned? I don't really like that policy for anything no matter how nefarious. Unless it's malware or a liability and going to land the visitor in prison.

  • Elon Musk Admits To Cheating In Path Of Exile 2 And Diablo 4 Amid Fake Gamer Controversy

    Jump

  • Mastodon’s founder cedes control, refuses to become next Musk or Zuckerberg

    Jump

  • Oh cool, I didn't realize they added that. I tried Mastadon a while ago and couldn't find anything interesting. I don't use any micro blogging apps.

  • Mastodon’s founder cedes control, refuses to become next Musk or Zuckerberg

    Jump

  • I'm pretty sure Bluesky has hashtags. Subscribing to a hashtag and muting someone temporarily is nice. I think the main feature Mastadon is missing is discovery algorithms. Most people use that heavily on social media, whether they admit they value it or not.

  • Mastodon’s founder cedes control, refuses to become next Musk or Zuckerberg

    Jump

  • What features?

  • Mastodon’s founder cedes control, refuses to become next Musk or Zuckerberg

    Jump

  • It has more features, and most people don't know why Mastadon might be better. The average person doesn't even know what a server is.

  • Thunder

    Jump

  • Ken M tweets are honorary memes

  • Please introduce me to Marxism (and Marxist Lemmy)

    Jump
  • Deleted

    Plebbit is a peer-to-peer Reddit alternative that allows you to self host and own your own community

    Jump

  • Holochain is an interesting option I haven't seen mentioned.

  • Saint Luigi

    Jump

  • That's interesting, thank you. I'm still not sure it would be the same for them level of tax increase public healthcare would require, but maybe you're right.

  • Saint Luigi

    Jump

  • I would prefer a progressive tax which would be easier to do on the national level.

  • Saint Luigi

    Jump

  • As for the Capital flight, that is a myth

    I'm not sure it's even negligible between countries, but I am specifically talking about capital flight between US states, where there is a very low barrier to exit. Do you have any reason to believe that isn't a phenomenon?

  • Saint Luigi

    Jump

  • a flat amount rather than a flat rate

    So a regressive tax

  • Saint Luigi

    Jump

  • Under current economic conditions, economic wealth is necessary for the functioning of the economy. Some (including me) would advocate for a redistribution/government seizure of capital, but I don't know of any economist who doesn't see it as a problem if the wealth is lost altogether. If taxes are imposed on a national level, it is less likely that the wealthy will flee to other countries than it is if they are imposed on a state level. Unless the government seizes all capital, or bans capital flight, there will always be a risk of losing that wealth to emigration.

  • Saint Luigi

    Jump

  • I never said it wouldn't be cheaper overall, I'm aware that's true. I'm saying for top earners, it won't. Insurance costs the same for everyone, taxes don't. The only way around that entirely is a regressive tax.

  • Saint Luigi

    Jump

  • I understand that it saves money overall. I don't understand how it could save money for individual high-income tax payers. At some earning level, your taxes will be raised by more than you would pay for insurance. Even under a flat tax, that has to be the case, right? You would need a regressive tax to actually make it beneficial to every single resident.

  • Saint Luigi

    Jump

  • I'm conceding that it might not always be the case. I don't have an answer to your question because I don't feel like doing the research and math to figure out what the top earners would pay in any given state under universal health insurance. It seems to me obvious that it would represent a large tax increase, and that that increase would disproportionately effect top earners. If you have reason to believe it would universally save people money, I'm all ears for a reason or argument.