site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 12, 2024

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

5
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

New homes and end to price-gouging: Harris sets economic goals

The Democratic presidential nominee's plans build on ideas from the Biden administration and aim at addressing voter concerns after a surge in prices since 2021.

The campaign's proposals include a "first-ever" tax credit for builders of homes sold to first-time buyers, as well as up to $25,000 in down-payment assistance for "eligible" first time buyers, a move that her campaign estimated could reach four million households over four years.

She has also called for capping the monthly price of diabetes-drug insulin at $35 for everyone, finding ways to cancel medical debt, and giving families a $6,000 tax credit the year they have a new child.

She is supporting a federal law banning firms from charging excessive prices on groceries and urged action on a bill in Congress that would bar property owners from using services that "coordinate" rents.

Though analysts say some of Harris's proposals, such as the ban on price-gouging, are likely to be popular, they have also sparked criticism from some economists. Bans on price-gouging already exist in many states, applied during emergencies such as hurricanes. But economists say the term is difficult to define and widening such rules could end up backfiring, by discouraging firms from making more at times of short supply.

Everyone likes free money, right? Building houses is good, having kids is good, paying less for life saving medications is good, taking power out of large landlords hands is good. But maybe trying to apply emergency price gouging laws to non-emergency situations is not so good. Maybe write a law that you have to lower prices when things are good as quickly as you raised them when they weren't so good. What are Trump's plans?

With populism ascendant in both parties, that cost has not dissuaded Trump's choice for vice president, JD Vance, from backing an even bigger tax credit expansion.

Economists predict that increased drilling would have limited impact given the global nature of energy markets and have warned that Trump's pledge to impose a tax of 10% or more on imports would drive up prices.

We're already producing a boatload of oil, but with russia somewhat out of the picture our european friends might appreciate it. Not sure about bringing down prices though.

A few months ago I commented on how vote buying is becoming commonplace of late.

Kamala's latest salvos have taken this to ridiculous new heights. It's hard to keep track but so far I see:

  • Student loan forgiveness
  • Medical debt forgiveness
  • Payments for people buying new homes
  • Payments for people paying more than 30% of their income as rent
  • Payments for newborns
  • Price controls on groceries !?

She even copied Trump's rather feeble attempt to buy votes with his "no taxes on tips" idea. (Not direct vote buying since this only offers relief from taxes, not direct payments).

Needless to say, subsidizing demand and price controls have a disastrous track record wherever they've been tried. Her policies, if implemented, would create huge disruptions in the market and likely to lead to high inflation as well as a serious and deep recession. If you are a net contributor to the tax system, things will become much worse for you as your taxes go up massively to pay for the freeloaders.

In other news, the price of gold hit an all-time high today.

I mean, to be fair, no taxes on tips acknowledges a de facto reality: who reports their tips in their tax returns? Enforcement would be impossible. As a handout to Nevada, it makes sense politically.

Harris's proposed policies make Trump look like the king of austerity. Considering how spendthrift he is, that's an accomplishment.

I mean, to be fair, no taxes on tips acknowledges a de facto reality: who reports their tips in their tax returns? Enforcement would be impossible. As a handout to Nevada, it makes sense politically.

Taxing tips is basically a huge part of IRS enforcement. It is why you always see stats that most audits are on low-mid income people. The IRS knows they dont report so they audit them and check bank statements, and almost always find the person was committing tax fraud by underreporting tips.

check bank statements,

In my country tips are much smaller and they're left as cash. Would there be a way to audit those? Are US tips all credit card based or given as part of waiter's salary?

Standard US tips are 20% of the bill. Restaurant owners strongly encourage credit card payments to 1) discourage employee theft and 2) prove their employees are making enough in tips to comply with certain regulations, both compensation and contract based. Tips left by credit card are paid to the waiter on a paycheck with the taxes already taken out.

That being said, waiters love it when they're tipped in cash and usually don't report it.

Standard US tips are 20% of the bill.

A cursory Google search suggests that 15 to 20 percent is the standard range.

Restaurant owners strongly encourage credit card payments

What about the big class-action lawsuit regarding credit-card fees? And the other lawsuit regarding credit-card policies that forbade businesses from "steering" customers away from credit cards and toward cash?

A cursory Google search suggests that 15 to 20 percent is the standard range

That's the commonly held definition by most people, but there has been a noticeable push towards making 20% the new standard. 20% is usually the default suggested amount on POS systems when I use them, and in some cases it's the lowest option displayed aside from "no tip". This is probably favored by both tipped staff and management, because it leads to larger tips and it reduces pressure for management to raise wages.

This is dumb for all kinds of reasons, chiefly that percentage-based tips are inherently indexed to inflation. And "muh inflation" is the most commonly employed defense of this movement by advocates.

I remember when a flat 15% was standard and 20% was reserved for exceptional service. It wasn't even that long ago. Bah humbug.

Believe it or not 10% used to be standard. And of course you are correct that tips are automatically adjusted for inflation (like TIPS, funnily enough) so there is no legitimate reason for the percentage to increase over time.

My family has severely curtailed restaurant outings for many reasons but personally that is one of mine.

More comments