Comment by shkkmo
4 years ago
You seem to have entirely missed the point.
> let’s just talk about reducing your tax burden as much as possible
For the purposes of the discussion, it is irrelevant if the overall tax burden should be raised or lowered. Given any target level of tax burden, it is inefficient to meet that tax burden by requiring large amounts of regulatory compliance by tax payers. If you can make tax rules simpler and easier to comply with, then you reduce the amount of bullshit work.
> The accounting industry employs loads of people. Is that not “value"?
Some of it is, some of it isn't. Simply providing jobs alone doesn't always produce value. If so, we could always grow the economy by paying people to dig holes and fill them back in.
The world is more complicated than you’re letting on. Democracies have complicated tax codes to incentivize certain behavior and also as a political tool. Legislators need to use tax incentives to ensure their base continues supporting them, and to win over new supporters.
Before you say “that’s messed up! Legislators shouldn’t do that!” Think for a second how anyone would possibly win an election and retain their power without that tool. I guarantee you couldn’t do it.
I’m all for simplifying our tax code but it’s not as simple as “this is all BS and those who make the rules are dumb.”
> Legislators need to use tax incentives to ensure their base continues supporting them, and to win over new supporters.
If it's legislators serving the interests of their constituents directly and thus get re-elected, that is one thing. However often legislators make these decisions to serve corporate lobbyists (such as Intuit's) and are working against the interests of their constituents so they can raise money from corporate doners to get reelected. This is why the IRS has been prevented from offering any sane method of filing personal taxes and wastes unmeasured amounts of tax payer time, effort and money every year.
> it’s not as simple as “this is all BS and those who make the rules are dumb.”
I didn't say that at all. Optimal taxation strategies are hard, but we haven't really tried to fix taxation in decades, meanwhile the length of the tax code has ballooned to several times what it used to be.
> If it's legislators serving the interests of their constituents directly and thus get re-elected, that is one thing. However often legislators make these decisions to serve corporate lobbyists (such as Intuit's) and are working against the interests of their constituents so they can raise money from corporate doners to get reelected.
I actually think we’ve found some common ground here. It’s pretty wack that corporate interests can create detrimental effects on society. But realize that corporations are ALSO the representatives constituents! I wish the world didn’t work this way, but it does.
So since societal governance works this way, I’m sticking to my guns and still argue that accounting departments provide actual value.