Correct
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-27 19:40:47 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861857724549697785
Reply addressees: @hcocchi @ValerioCapraro
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861533133876629724
Correct
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-27 19:40:47 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861857724549697785
Reply addressees: @hcocchi @ValerioCapraro
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861533133876629724
Like Hayek, I understood the problem wasn’t economics, it was law. And the problem of law was epistemology. And the problem of epistemology was the extraordinary sophistication of human deception.
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-27 19:39:04 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861857291928244716
Reply addressees: @MaeliusNL @ValerioCapraro
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861423832927465601
Friedman was correct of course. I found Galbrath exasperating.
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-27 19:37:48 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861856972758479074
Reply addressees: @eric_harris_76 @ValerioCapraro
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861552955305906568
(Exactly. Just as with all else in life.)
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-27 19:35:34 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861856409253753226
Reply addressees: @karlbykarlsmith @ValerioCapraro
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861577960823644462
Cant be done, but they dont have thumbs. so sure. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-27 19:33:41 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861855934986977434
Reply addressees: @JimDMiller
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861837505479200967
RT @curtdoolittle: @ThruTheHayes @manknownaspaul @shade_forrest @AutistocratMS @bierlingm @bryanbrey @NoahRevoy @LukeWeinhagen @WerrellBrad…
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-27 19:31:26 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861855371859787855
We will have another conference, but after we publish volume one, and after we have some visibility into how the ‘first 100 days’ plays out.
Our goal was to (a) produce a canon of videos (we have), (b) get the team comfortable with pitching their piece of the pie. (c) test our ideas on the audience (d) build some relationships.
The relationships are wonderful and the spirit produced by meeting with you all is just inspirational.
But until we know whether we need to reinforce the trump victory or return to civil war, we aren’t necessarily sure which direction to take, nor do we want to try to organize people during a period of what we expect will be chaos.
So late next spring I expect us to make that determination and schedule something in that vein.
Reply addressees: @ThruTheHayes @manknownaspaul @shade_forrest @AutistocratMS @bierlingm @bryanbrey @NoahRevoy @LukeWeinhagen @WerrellBradley @SurragoMichael @SaitouHajime00 @JRavencall @MCBashaw @grayzoneintel @JoshuaLisec
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-27 19:31:23 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861855355493609472
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861851605475426323
“However, it’s worth noting that while the fundamental tax law might be around 100 pages, this doesn’t account for all related regulations, guidelines, and interpretations that might exist separately or within administrative practices.
This concise approach to tax legislation is often admired for its efficiency but should not be confused with the total body of tax-related laws, which could encompass additional rules and directives not contained in the primary tax code document itself.
The mention of 100 pages typically refers to the core or basic tax law, not including all ancillary regulations or international tax agreements which Sweden is part of. This length reflects the main principles of taxation, leaving detailed implementation and interpretation to administrative guidance and case law.”
So, just as we in the States have a constitution that lays out the fundamental principles in short prose, we also have legislation and regulatory code, as well as findings of the courts.
Also, Sweden is a small homogenous country. America is a federation, that of large diverse states, with a complex economy. As such our federal system uses tax breaks and loopholes as an incentive instead of laws. IMO we could offer a different and simple tax code for citizens, one for corporations, and one for financial institutions, and vastly simplify the code into basic principles. The problem is we’d have to have the same level of trust in our government as the Swedes – and we don’t. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
Sweden’s tax system is designed with several fundamental principles that guide its structure and operation.
Here are some of the basic principles:
Simplicity and Transparency:
The Swedish tax code aims to be straightforward, making it easier for citizens and businesses to understand and comply with tax obligations. This simplicity reduces the need for extensive documentation and complex regulations.
Broad-Based Taxation:
Sweden employs a broad tax base with few exemptions or deductions, which means that a wide array of income and economic activities are taxed. This helps in distributing the tax burden more evenly across the population.
Progressive Taxation:
The income tax system in Sweden is progressive, meaning that higher income brackets are taxed at higher rates. This principle aims to ensure that those with greater financial resources contribute more to public services.
Social Welfare and Redistribution:
A significant portion of tax revenue is used to fund the extensive welfare state, which includes healthcare, education, unemployment benefits, and child care. The tax system is designed to redistribute wealth, aiming for social equality and a high standard of living for all citizens.
Equality and Fairness:
There’s an underlying principle of treating taxpayers equally, where similar incomes or economic activities should be taxed similarly. This includes efforts to minimize tax loopholes that could be exploited by the wealthy or corporations.
Efficiency in Administration:
The Swedish Tax Agency (Skatteverket) is known for its efficiency in tax collection and administration. This is facilitated by technology, like pre-filled tax returns, which simplifies the process for taxpayers.
Voluntary Compliance:
There’s a strong culture of voluntary compliance in Sweden, supported by high levels of trust in the government and tax authorities. This trust reduces the need for extensive enforcement measures.
Environmental Taxes:
Sweden incorporates environmental considerations into its tax policies through taxes on carbon emissions, energy use, and other environmental impacts, promoting sustainability.
Global Cooperation:
Sweden adheres to international tax standards and cooperates with other countries to prevent tax evasion and ensure that multinational corporations pay appropriate taxes.
Local Taxation:
Municipalities in Sweden can levy income tax, which allows for local governance and decision-making regarding local services, although this is within the framework set by national tax policy.
These principles contribute to Sweden’s reputation for having a tax system that is both effective in generating revenue for public services and relatively easy for taxpayers to navigate, although individual experiences might vary based on personal or business tax complexities.
Reply addressees: @Lord__Sousa @MarioNawfal
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-27 17:44:58 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861828577442013184
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861826101363855421
Just in terms of the economy and ecology of the brain’s ability to produce information in time. The net result is to serve survival via the senses. But we separate these from neural economy (neurons) to behavioral economy (behavior).
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-27 17:27:12 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861824106553024981
Reply addressees: @orion_pulse
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861820146685202464
I think our work on the grammars and logic is superior to traditional teachings but the result is the same.
That leaves Arithmetic and Geometry (mathematical logic), Astronomy (physics, systems, environments), rhetoric (expression), and Music (harmony and emotion).
I think the structure of those ancient methods was to teach thinking in patterns and scale – much different from the primitivism of earlier thought, especially the primitivism of middle eastern thought. It’s very naturalistic.
I agree with that objective. My concern is that all of these are necessary:
1. Physics: The question of Physics, Biology, Chemistry and Engineering a foundation.
2. Behavior: Cognitive science, Behavioral Science, Economics, Ethics, Law, and Politics are the ‘systems’.
3. Measurement: Arithmetic, Accounting, Mathematics, Computation (automation, simulation), and Economic thinking (supply-demand and disequilibrium) the systems of measurement.
4. Reason and Argument: Writing, Reading, Grammar, Logic, and Rhetoric the system of expression.
5. Execution: Task, project, and program management their means of application.
Reply addressees: @Lord__Sousa
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-27 17:09:31 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861819653900963840
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861801648093286511