Neighbors helping neighbors? A collective group pooling resources in order to get social benefits? Community organizations? This all smells like dirty communism.
"Yeah, but what if we used AI?"
Submitted 6 months ago by FlyingSquid@lemmy.world to aboringdystopia@lemmy.world
https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/bd6b4ffe-3f13-49c7-9e68-eab222e38518.png
Comments
ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 6 months ago
pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 6 months ago
HOAs typically end up fascist, though.
Aux@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Just like all communism attempts. Because when you put a community over an individual you get fascism.
aidan@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Sadly people like to tell other people what to do
dogsoahC@lemm.ee 6 months ago
So, national(ist) socialism?
NeptuneOrbit@lemmy.world 6 months ago
*HOAs which reinvented taxes
HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 6 months ago
HOA’s reinvented municipal government in a way that let them be racist again.
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 6 months ago
So its taxes all the way down…
lawrence@lemmy.world 6 months ago
InfiniteStruggle@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
Sure, but this time they can be sure their money goes to themselves instead of those pesky vulnerable sections of society.
jkrtn@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
This is the correct answer. I’m sure Repubs are somewhat willing to contribute to improving a group as long as they personally benefit from every contribution.
JareeZy@feddit.de 6 months ago
That is the unironic basis of my “enlightened centrists” friends beliefs. He doesn’t want the poor people he sees on TV and at the bus stop to benefit from his money. Nevermind that he received a free education and has all the benefits of living in a first world country.
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 months ago
That’s the whole idea behind “philanthropic foundations.” Rich people benefit from “charity” by getting huge tax write-offs.
And then the government decides that society can depend on those charities rather than any sort of social safety net.
force@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I’m not so sure considering the bizarre reality that many people on welfare also think people who take government aid are lazy and we should abolish welfare
ScruffyDucky@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Or bank bailouts
dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world 6 months ago
This is basically just as opaque as a charity or HOA, with different steps. Which is great unless your community is poor.
My contention with this concept is that with taxes, I can vote for people that manage both the money gathering rules and how it is spent. That and the money typically works in a much larger pool spread across a wide range of socioeconomic groups, which can vastly improve its reach and capability. On top of all that, it’s also transparent. My guess is this has no such features.
Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I lived and worked in a lot of poor communities and neighborhoods.
We have to organize our own clean ups, our own neighborhood watch, our own events.
Richer neighborhoods get a lot more resources from the city.
Socsa@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
Right, that’s the whole point of HOAs. The do all the same shit local government does, but without neediyto share with the poors.
ripcord@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I was watching a thing not too long ago where a dude was praising the “safety net” of home and health insurance and almost in the next breath complaining how socialized medicine was a scam and welfare
I was like “MF you JUST said you wanted a group safety net”
Theharpyeagle@lemmy.world 6 months ago
But they unironically would rather spend more on insurance than risk having any of their money go to the poors.
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 months ago
They want a group safety net for the in-group they are a part of.
capital@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Cooperative Capital lets people pool small amounts of money, vote on how they want to invest it to improve their neighborhood–and then generates returns.
fastcompany.com/…/this-startup-lets-neighbors-poo…
I’m not saying this is good or bad. But you wrote a lot a received great feedback from the community despite no one actually reading what it is, evidently.
jg1i@lemmy.world 6 months ago
First I thought this was dumb, but actually… It doesn’t seem like taxes really get distributed to everyone. I live in a poor neighborhood and our streets are all jacked up, but somehow the rich neighborhoods always have nice streets. Am I paying taxes so the rich people get nicer streets? How do I get the city to fix our roads too?
Gestrid@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
our streets are all jacked up
Not that it’ll really help your situation, but you should look into whether or not your state’s Department of Transportation (DOT) has some sort of reporting tool online.
Mine does, and I’ve used it to report several issues, including several potholes on my neighborhood road. The potholes were filled within a week after I reported it.
Lianodel@ttrpg.network 6 months ago
Am I paying taxes so the rich people get nicer streets?
RGB3x3@lemmy.world 6 months ago
But the takeaway is not to get rid of taxes. The solution is to properly distribute tax funds across all areas, rather than funnel money to the top.
We don’t have enough systems in place to prevent the rich from taking more than their fair share.
Shyfer@ttrpg.network 6 months ago
But I don’t think this startup would help. The poor neighborhoods would still have less to invest. Privatizing taxes would just make the poorer neighborhoods worse and the richer neighborhoods nicer.
rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 6 months ago
It depends. Yes, poor neighborhoods pay less taxes, and rich pay more taxes. But the imbalance in expenses may be even bigger, because of the way priorities work.
It’s the same as minority representation in democracies (and the reason Soviet system, not the real one, but the theoretical one, is bad), when representatives are chosen by voting, the minority has fewer chances of being represented than if sortition (randomization) is used.
ICastFist@programming.dev 6 months ago
Am I paying taxes so the rich people get nicer streets?
Yes, unironically.
How do I get the city to fix our roads too?
By being rich, or having rich friends, or managing to gather a lot of people (50+) at the front of your politicians’ offices (or their homes for extra effect) and make the demand
Aux@lemmy.world 6 months ago
The problem is two fold. First, the poorer people pay less taxes, thus their streets have less money. Additionally, the richer folk tend to donate to funds to make additional improvement. The solution is simple - pay more money.
ITGuyLevi@programming.dev 6 months ago
I’d argue the poor pay a vastly higher percentage of their income on taxes, but I like to include all taxes in that figure, not just income tax.
maynarkh@feddit.nl 6 months ago
Yeah, but where do the rich people get more money from than the poor? And I don’t mean middle-class doctor/lawyer “rich”, I mean CEO-of-15-companies rich.
EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Yes we’ve had taxes but what about second taxes
iAvicenna@lemmy.world 6 months ago
but they are voluntary! said the rich guy while frantically masturbating
hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 months ago
At least there’s hope the money is not used to bomb schools in middle east
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 months ago
There are a lot of Israeli companies operating in America…
hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 months ago
Okay fair. There’s a non-zero chance the money won’t be used to bomb schools in middle east
rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
Mutual aid but worse
grrgyle@slrpnk.net 6 months ago
Like you do it for mutu bux that can be redeemed in the local swag shop for things like seeds (good for 1 growing season) and good-feels (license to make a pop-up community garden in the square (garden for display purposes only))
TheFriar@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Community land trusts seem like a creative solution at the moment
summerof69@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Funny meme, silly rage bait title.
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Welcome to A Boring Dystopia. First time?
summerof69@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Kind of. I don’t know rules and traditions of all communities I see on the “all” feed!
capital@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Everyone’s commenting like they don’t know this is voluntary, unlike taxes.
Agree or disagree, at least understand your opponent’s actual position.
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I don’t think anyone here does not understand the difference between compulsory taxes and this nonsense which won’t work specifically because you don’t have to put money into it. It’s a libertarian’s idea of taxation.
rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 6 months ago
This is intentional. Many people refuse to notice the aspect of having a choice on all issues.
“It’s good for everyone” or “it’s bad for everyone”, which conveniently removes others’ personal borders and also the responsibility.
Gork@lemm.ee 6 months ago
It’s the Libertarian® Paradise™
TexasDrunk@lemmy.world 6 months ago
There was a commenter the other day (I wish I could remember who) that said something along the lines of libertarians regularly reinvent things we already have.
petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 months ago
Doesn’t call out libertarians specifically, but it’s appropriate. :p
Also, hello Piped bot.
aidan@lemmy.world 6 months ago
The difference is generally they make it voluntary
Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
What if we privatize government?
RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Yeah, but these “taxes” get used on their stuff, and none of those other people get any of that money.
Aux@lemmy.world 6 months ago
That’s how it should be.
SwingingKoala@discuss.tchncs.de 6 months ago
You want your money to fund wars, bloated government agencies and such?
AdmiralShat@programming.dev 6 months ago
Why does a startup let people do this? Were people not able to do this before and now with a start up suddenly they can? How much does the start up get?
John_McMurray@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Natalie thinks she’s clever but doesn’t know the difference between taxation and a co-operative.
moon@lemmy.cafe 6 months ago
tech bros reinvent socialism
randon31415@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Every politcian: So how do we funnel this money to kill foreigners while profiting by taking kickbacks from weapon manufacturers?
ripcord@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Pretty sure it’s only the last part that matters.
Killing the foreigners is usually way secondary.
ThePyroPython@lemmy.world 6 months ago
No, tech bros discover co-operative banking.
oo1@kbin.social 6 months ago
yeah came here to say it seems more like bank or building societies.
qwerty@discuss.tchncs.de 6 months ago
To make it more like real taxes assault and kidnap anyone who refuses to participate.
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Can you name a functional civilization that had no taxation?
aidan@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Can you name a functional civilization without oppressing some minority populations? Does that mean oppressing minority populations is good or necessary?
qwerty@discuss.tchncs.de 6 months ago
FOSS has no taxes, people support the projects they like on their own volition, this ensures that the money goes to where it’s supposed to instead of bombing foreign countries or oppressing local communities. I see no reason why this system couldn’t scale.
I never said that there should be no taxes, but I’m also not going to pretend that there isn’t a degree of duress, coercion, extoextortion, non-consent which I consider fundamentally evil, perhaps a necessary one but evil nonetheless and I think it should be minimised.
TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I am very much in favor of using violence to take resources from people that don’t give back to the community they rely on. It’s a good thing to take money from the rich and greedy using violence. There is no imaginable society where people should be permitted to not contribute when they are capable of contributing.
If people are permitted to not contribute excess power, it places more of the burden on everyone else to make up for it. On top of that, as the tax dodger accumulates too much control over resources(wealth), they can use those resources to hire people that then impose violence on the community when they try to take the resources back.
If anything, an anarchist society should be more vigilant of resource accumulation, forcing each other to contribute through violence and ensuring that large power imbalances don’t emerge. There would be no state to handle redistribution, so it’d be the responsibility of every individual to make sure everyone has enough. There’d be no justification for anyone to have too much exclusive control over important resources, nor would there be a justification to not give excess resources to ensure everyone has the essentials.
In a society that prohibits excessive wealth imbalance or centralization of control, there’d be power inequality, but there’d also be a well established ceiling and floor to the inequality. That will always require some form of progressive “taxation” or system of redistribution. There’d also need to be taxation on almost all worker productivity to help develop public goods that everyone will benefit from. Everyone would need to chip in what they can if they need a new communal well, or if they need to maintain the roads, or need to put someone’s home out if it caught fire. People would need to contribute even if they don’t benefit from the particular public service, as they might benefit from another one more than others.
A well functioning society must require people to contribute what they can to maintain & improve the community, must take from those that don’t contribute by force, must tax people even if they don’t consent. This isn’t optional for any system, state or no state. If it fails, exploitation, abuse, and suffering will destabilize the system until it falls apart from under its own weight. A society that taxes properly can minimize violence, maximize efficiency, and be far safer for everyone without exception. Even those on top are constantly in danger of being deposed by someone who wants their position, as well as the people they exploit.
Tldr: Yes, we must use violence to force contribution. Not doing so only causes more violence. Violence is unavoidable, and can only be minimized by ensuring no one gets too powerful to oppress.
aidan@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Yeahhh I definitely disagree this is a fundamental truth. Not because you’re necessarily wrong from your perspective, but because we have fundamentally different values.
IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Choosing to pool resources for specific needs is a pretty long shot from a huge generalized fund that you must pay into. But yeah, sick burn.
Signtist@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Except when you get more and more people in the group, the wants of any given individual get outweighed for larger, more generalized expenses. This is literally the same concept as taxes, just applied to a small enough group that an individual gets a real say in how the money is spent.
But if it works well it’ll inevitably get popular, attract more users, and the voice of the many will drown out the voice of the few, with out-of-touch treasurers spending the money unwisely, becoming exactly the same in every way as taxes.
0x2d@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
you reminded me of the google chrome automatic tab sorting using ai
it sends the url and title of all your open tabs to google (very privacy friendly!!)
and it puts tabs into different colored categories with short titles and emoji icons next to them
for example if i have open the sites for a bunch of search engines it might create a category called “Search Engine 🔍”
JoYo@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
this is how to fight gentrification but sure white girl call it taxes.
NerdyPopRocks@programming.dev 6 months ago
Anyone else thinking this will be used for laundering money instead of anything good for society?
BobGnarley@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Well, you don’t get to control where your taxes go. This you can
buzz86us@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I’d be in if this allowed secession from traditional state taxes and local codes
webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 6 months ago
Give it a few more year and honestly i can see AI capable of pulling this off
Zachariah@lemmy.world 6 months ago
But this way third parties can get their cut.
andrew@lemmy.stuart.fun 6 months ago
Taxes have that feature too, sadly. No system is perfect.
bitfucker@programming.dev 6 months ago
Well, I guess it is fair for someone that manages those resources full time to get their payment for their management labour from those pool of resources no? The implementation is what must be very strictly looked out for and be as transparent as possible. It is why we have created a country along with its governmental system. Now, whether ANY currently implemented system is perfect or not is another debate.
umbrella@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
at least we are voting, somewhat choosing those
HubertManne@kbin.social 6 months ago
yes but what about second third party pip?
sudo42@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Every new business model now is just insinuating themselves into an existing structure so they can grift/leech money out for themselves. They call it “innovation “.
affiliate@lemmy.world 6 months ago
they finally found a way to add a built in service fee to taxes. i just hope this new model is compatible with turbo tax premium