Source? Or is it just your impression?

Just be sure to find another job before quitting. Always easier to find a job when you already have one.

I honestly think they’d understand it about as much as they’d currently understand it - that is, not understanding it very much at all. So I think it would be about the same level of understanding but it would make a lot more sense and would be easier to calculate with.

It’d also remove a lot of incentives for squeezing your income/pension contribution to align with certain thresholds (i.e. tax bracket thresholds).

For example, a sigmoid function (click link for equation). You’d need to mess with the constants to align the function with a range of incomes but the general shape will be the same - a low, almost-zero taxation rate for those who earn the least, rising to a threshold (perhaps even 100%, but a lower value like 75% would probably work as well), giving a high taxation to those who earn the most.

I’m not speaking against progressive taxation, I’m saying the brackets should be continuous so there aren’t any sharp turns in taxation. Right now the brackets make the taxation discrete, but I feel it should be continuous.

A continuous bracket could be defined by a single equation. You’d plug in your income and you’d get out your taxation. No need to look up what bracket you are in.

Why? To me it’d be much more intuitive. I find brackets quite confusing

Never understood the idea of tax brackets. Why isn’t it just continuous? Computers are calculating the tax now anyway, not like it would be infeasible.

when people start unionizing, they just fire everyone

Yea this needs to be made illegal obviously. But that’s hard. And that’s where it becomes political. You can’t get around the fact that it is political unfortunately.

Of course it’s collective bargaining, that’s what I mean with “organize”. I don’t mean just organize within your workplace, I mean organize within entire fields and industries.

Friend, you don’t know how unions work at a core level.

This sounds kind of condescending and mean. In Denmark we have large unions that cover whole industries and fields and they work very well for collective bargaining and securing good levels of compensation, vacation and good work environments. I am myself a member of such a union. So please don’t assume that I don’t know how unions work.

Yea definitely don’t disagree with that. I think that is a factor too. But I think it also kind of goes hand in hand. Do you have similar ideas because you organized and kind of aligned your ideas, or did you organize because your ideas are similar and you easily agreed to organize? It’s kind of a chicken and egg thing.

I’ve also often thought that countries like the US are just too big. There’s too many people to take into consideration. A country like Denmark with ~6 million people is much easier to keep track of and the governance and politics is closer to reality.

It is about politics. You need to organise yourselves better into unions. Then, you strike until you get what you deserve.

Why does Denmark and the rest of the Nordic countries have so high quality of living and happy people? Cause the people realized that you need to work together to get what you want. You need to have solidarity with your other workers to push for better compensation and work environments.

Do this, or you’re doomed.

What do all you guys use these setups for?

Even if you could, Linus Torvalds is not a fan of the v3 license.

Why not?

The Free Software Foundation explicitly forbade tivoization in version 3 of the GNU General Public License. However, although version 3 has been adopted by many software projects, the authors of the Linux kernel have notably declined to move from version 2 to version 3.

How come Linux doesn’t use GPL v3?

Should the government collect taxes on the buoyant times but then refund them during market downturns? That would be a nightmare. No government wants to be on the hook for refunds during a downturn.

AFAIK Danish tax on stock gains/losses works like this. Stock gains are heavily taxed while stock losses give you a tax rebate.

Very strange that such a change could lead to such a problem, but sometimes databases are weird black boxes like that 🤷

Thanks for all the work!

What was the bug in the end out of curiosity?

I don’t actually see that many political questions in this comm but maybe that’s just me. Looking at the top of all time, I mostly notice this one, which honestly is more like a rant than a question (I dislike Trump as much as the next guy but this is clearly not a neutrally stated/good faith question and just a way for the OP to vent their frustration) and should probably be removed on that basis rather than it being a political question.

Honestly looking further, a lot of the political “questions” in this comm are just rants disguised as questions. I think it would make sense to disallow rants. You could say it’s already included under the “all posts must be legitimate questions” part of rule 1 but explicitly calling it out and enforcing it would be nice.