I really didn't understand the "economic infrastructure" argument and I'm not sure they did, either, as they didn't bother to elaborate in the article. I have spent a lot more online shopping in the last 8 months than I probably have in the last 8 years. My B&M spending has shifted to digital, but hasn't everyone's? Is "infrastructure" only thought of in physical terms?
Not to mention, workplace buildings are a large overhead cost for a business. So not sure how the employee is the one seeing the largest benefits from remote work?
I don't think it's about benefit. It's about people with full salaries being able to work like nothing is happening from home contributing more so people that HAVE TO work outside their homes get more. Thing you use to write this uses AP as well as cables. Those things have to be maintained physically, there needs to be a physical server to store this comment, and factory to produce those chips physically. So it's not about benefit it's about least amount of thank you we can express to such people maintaining it. I'm just looking at how a lot of people started defending their salaries but are shopping like insane. Couldn't "you" just not buy thing you actually don't need and spare a bit for things that you depend on directly to stay at home ("you" as in people complaining about taxes and buying stuff, not you specifically)?
I don't fully understand how could DB exploit this or so but I know there might be some bad stuff that could potentially happen. On the other hand the idea of paying a bit more taxes to say thanks to the ones keeping the infrastructure and modern lifestyle alive is not too much for me. Most of the world is not US, a lot of countries actually tax the rich even more than non wealthy citizens so it's not exactly "working class suffers only" scenario.
I don't disagree with the sentiment. I have been very privileged in my industry during COVID and did not experience any disruptions to life.
I have lived in six different states in the US, some were high-tax some and low-tax. The problem is more tax $ does not equal better outcomes. In fact some of the best states I've lived in were very low on taxes (i.e. no personal income or sales tax) but ran very efficient and honest governments - Oregon for example has no sales tax and actually runs their budget at a surplus and sends taxpayers additional refunds every year. Other states have very high levels of corruption - and VERY high taxes. If I'm going to pay 5% I would rather have it go directly to a person's rent than just siphoned into yet another black hole.
I agree with that, however as I said I understand they may be some issues on how to handle it without going into "balck hole" but I trust that Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and such have less corruption and can be trusted moving money to it's actual destination. Not to get too much into it I'm saying that depends on the trust issue with the country as I had with mine which is why I moved here in the first place. However I was pointing out that a lot of people that were loud in the beginning were actually complaining about getting less money even though they might have enough but they just don't want to help anyone. On different comment I was targeting "home office setup" as something that can also be regulated where if you can work from home but don't have equipment employer must allow you to take home such equipment. So in all basic underlying idea was not so bad but got really criticised.
// , “It is not so important to be serious as it is to be serious about the important things. The monkey wears an expression of seriousness... but the monkey is serious because he itches."(No/No)
The underlying idea used to justify this is not to "say thanks to the ones keeping the infrastructure and modern lifestyle alive is not too much for me." I got no problem with that, I guess. Like, maybe temporary boosted Medicare access for "First responders" and so-called "essential" workers? IDK. The justification and the ideas proposed would look a lot different if the rationale was something more like, ""say thanks to the ones keeping the infrastructure and modern lifestyle alive" and less like the usual Critical Theory.
What Deutsche Bank's proposed is literally called a "Privilege Tax." What does "Privilege" mean, in that case? Does it mean the underlying idea is that those with a "Privilege" (with a capital "P") are oppressing, rather than helping, those without?
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I really didn't understand the "economic infrastructure" argument and I'm not sure they did, either, as they didn't bother to elaborate in the article. I have spent a lot more online shopping in the last 8 months than I probably have in the last 8 years. My B&M spending has shifted to digital, but hasn't everyone's? Is "infrastructure" only thought of in physical terms?
Not to mention, workplace buildings are a large overhead cost for a business. So not sure how the employee is the one seeing the largest benefits from remote work?
I don't think it's about benefit. It's about people with full salaries being able to work like nothing is happening from home contributing more so people that HAVE TO work outside their homes get more. Thing you use to write this uses AP as well as cables. Those things have to be maintained physically, there needs to be a physical server to store this comment, and factory to produce those chips physically. So it's not about benefit it's about least amount of thank you we can express to such people maintaining it. I'm just looking at how a lot of people started defending their salaries but are shopping like insane. Couldn't "you" just not buy thing you actually don't need and spare a bit for things that you depend on directly to stay at home ("you" as in people complaining about taxes and buying stuff, not you specifically)?
I don't fully understand how could DB exploit this or so but I know there might be some bad stuff that could potentially happen. On the other hand the idea of paying a bit more taxes to say thanks to the ones keeping the infrastructure and modern lifestyle alive is not too much for me. Most of the world is not US, a lot of countries actually tax the rich even more than non wealthy citizens so it's not exactly "working class suffers only" scenario.
I don't disagree with the sentiment. I have been very privileged in my industry during COVID and did not experience any disruptions to life.
I have lived in six different states in the US, some were high-tax some and low-tax. The problem is more tax $ does not equal better outcomes. In fact some of the best states I've lived in were very low on taxes (i.e. no personal income or sales tax) but ran very efficient and honest governments - Oregon for example has no sales tax and actually runs their budget at a surplus and sends taxpayers additional refunds every year. Other states have very high levels of corruption - and VERY high taxes. If I'm going to pay 5% I would rather have it go directly to a person's rent than just siphoned into yet another black hole.
I agree with that, however as I said I understand they may be some issues on how to handle it without going into "balck hole" but I trust that Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and such have less corruption and can be trusted moving money to it's actual destination. Not to get too much into it I'm saying that depends on the trust issue with the country as I had with mine which is why I moved here in the first place. However I was pointing out that a lot of people that were loud in the beginning were actually complaining about getting less money even though they might have enough but they just don't want to help anyone. On different comment I was targeting "home office setup" as something that can also be regulated where if you can work from home but don't have equipment employer must allow you to take home such equipment. So in all basic underlying idea was not so bad but got really criticised.
The underlying idea used to justify this is not to "say thanks to the ones keeping the infrastructure and modern lifestyle alive is not too much for me." I got no problem with that, I guess. Like, maybe temporary boosted Medicare access for "First responders" and so-called "essential" workers? IDK. The justification and the ideas proposed would look a lot different if the rationale was something more like, ""say thanks to the ones keeping the infrastructure and modern lifestyle alive" and less like the usual Critical Theory.
What Deutsche Bank's proposed is literally called a "Privilege Tax." What does "Privilege" mean, in that case? Does it mean the underlying idea is that those with a "Privilege" (with a capital "P") are oppressing, rather than helping, those without?