Notices by 🐧 Jonathan Treffler 🇺🇦🇵🇸 (jonathantreffler@gruene.social)

@freemo @randahl This is a TERRIBLE idea. Tarrifs work in effect the same way VAT Taxes work (collected differently, but in the end the consumer pays for it in relation to how much they buy). Therefore like VAT they are regressive taxes (meaning poorer households pay a higher percentage of their income). That is because you can't not buy food for example, no matter the price, you literally have to eat.

(1/3)

@freemo @randahl The demand is inelastic -> it makes up a higher percentage of the spending of poorer households.

Billionares don't spend most of their money, they hoard, invest or donate it, none of that is directly impacted by tarrifs (other than that they could crash the economy if levied on everything from entire countries like china for example).

Income tax on the other hand is usually progressive, so higher income households pay more.

(2/3)

@freemo @randahl

So unless you want reverse-wellfare for the rich, you don't want tarrifs.

(3/3)

@thomasfuchs And BlueSky fixed the being confusing problem by being a federated network with exactly one node ?

I have seen a lot of talk of how BlueSky will fix problems of ActivityPub, but always with an asterisk *Not yet implemented, not even technical details on how they want to do it available.

I am by no means rooting for BlueSky to fail, it is theoretically federated afterall, but so far I have seen big talk and little to show for it on a technical level 🤷♂️.