I think your point about a choice of taxes is very close to my argument of involuntary taxes. While I agree there are some things that you must contribute to have law and order - there are other things I don't want to subsidize. If my town lacks sidewalks, cars drive too fast and etc. - why should you pay for other towns problems first? Because somebody needs more votes from that other town they get to take my money against my will?
Also, for example, I don't like some study programs and I really like some of them. Problem is - I can't choose which ones to subsidize for students. If that's the case - I wouldn't subsidize any of them, but I am forced to do so. Even if I think its harmful.
I think this problem arise/will arise in many different places: North vs South Italy, Catalonia vs Spain, young people to carry aging population and etc.
I think your goal is impossible. Even in soviet union that wasn't the case. The best specialists (let's say top surgeons) will always have more influence. If you know that your survivability rate is 50% higher at one surgeon hands than the rest - won't you pay/do whatever you can to survive?
If you are taxed involuntary - isn't that stealing? Well technically by law it is legal and enforced for everyone, but it still is stealing.
For example: if everybody is under the immoral law and some people are better than others at avoiding the immoral law - is it morally okay for those people to avoid that law?
Edit: by involuntary I mean if person can't choose. Not talking about businesses
Maybe Elm itself is a killer app, but certainly not elm-ui. I don't think Datomic is a killer app too. Its certainly not comparable to Rails/OSes at scale
All this China censorship made me think. Starting to get this feeling that more and more choices made by me (to buy/to use/endorse) are becoming more like a political votes. Just happy there are things/ideas free from politics
If every humans wants to protect earth and "Selfishness of individuals triumph over long term global cause" - how come selfishness doesn't fix this problem? Seems like a contradiction to me
I guess what I meant - I looked at these issues differently, others probably too.
Apple, Google "selling out" to be in China? Oh well - that seems reasonable since its a big market.
South Park put it into different perspective. I guess that is what art does
South Park is spot on this season. You could say they are good with predictions, but I think they just gave different perspective to something that already has been happening
(episodes on China censorship)
"Red Hat urges the FSF board to seize the opportunity during its current leadership succession by appointing a president and members of its board that are more diverse, including from a national, racial and gender perspective."
at least in my country's constitution discrimination based on race/gender is forbidden (No person should be limited by law or granted privileges based on his sex/race/nationality/... . Statement like this is exactly that. I imagine other countries have similar laws - how are things like that acceptable?
Well, for me it seems two ideas are mixed up here. Non profits can do exactly that - instead of focusing on profits they can maximize other "stakeholders". Corporations with goal to maximize profits are not going away, because investors will not invest into non profits expecting return on investment
Also, for example, I don't like some study programs and I really like some of them. Problem is - I can't choose which ones to subsidize for students. If that's the case - I wouldn't subsidize any of them, but I am forced to do so. Even if I think its harmful.
I think this problem arise/will arise in many different places: North vs South Italy, Catalonia vs Spain, young people to carry aging population and etc.