site banner
PaperclipPerfector  7mo ago (text post)   31248 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 28, 2025

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.

7
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Actually, I’d say there’s a better case for itemizing tariffs than sales tax, since the latter doesn’t actually give you any choice. The state of Texas is going to get its cut no matter which goods Amazon sells to Texans.

This does make me wonder if tobacco companies are prohibited, in some way, from itemizing vice taxes. I’d have thought they would be eager to remind customers why they’re paying more.

For that matter, where do all these people who think taxes being paid is a bad thing go

They don’t think that. They think having to pay a tax is a bad thing. What happens after that is handwaved.

Nor do they really go anywhere. If a traditional tax hike was on the table, they’d flip out about it, too. But Trump is a populist, and has demonstrated less than zero interest in the normal legislative process, so that’s a non-starter.

Actually, I’d say there’s a better case for itemizing tariffs than sales tax, since the latter doesn’t actually give you any choice. The state of Texas is going to get its cut no matter which goods Amazon sells to Texans.

I suppose that's true: the seller's costs don't matter to you, but it could at least signal to you that you might be able to find cheaper options elsewhere, at least in the small niches where there is a vaguely competitive American-made option that isn't itself dragged down by tariffs on part imports.

They don’t think that. They think having to pay a tax is a bad thing. What happens after that is handwaved.

Nor do they really go anywhere. If a traditional tax hike was on the table, they’d flip out about it, too. But Trump is a populist, and has demonstrated less than zero interest in the normal legislative process, so that’s a non-starter.

Would they? I've heard a decent amount of flipping out about Trump's proposed 'tax cuts'-- scare quotes because they're almost all extensions of 2017 cuts. (He is, bizarrely, considering removing the cap on SALT again, though? I'd always considered that his single best policy move; why should the Federal government subsidize rich states' high spending?) In other words, they're complaining about the absence of a hike. Granted, most of them seem to think these cuts just benefit the wealthy (fairly ridiculous; doubling the standard deduction and the child credit disproportionately benefit the middle class) so I suppose they're at least not knowingly advocating for raising their own taxes.

Cuts aren't just the absence of a hike. They can be painted as hypocritical, irresponsible, buying votes. I think Democrats saw the cuts as a possible wedge between Trump and the deficit hawks.

I also suspect that the benefits of the original cuts were, in fact, concentrated in the wealthy. See table 3 here. It also definitely benefited corporations. This wasn't contested by Republicans, who preferred to justify it as stimulating investment.

This does make me wonder if tobacco companies are prohibited, in some way, from itemizing vice taxes

Not sure, but tobacco and hard liquor companies are definitely prohibited from selling directly to the public- everything is marked up from the taxed price.

The state of Texas is going to get its cut no matter which goods Amazon sells to Texans.

I'm old enough to remember a time before online retailers regularly collected sales taxes (apparently nationwide starting in 2017 after a SCOTUS decision).

(apparently nationwide starting in 2017 after a SCOTUS decision)

Huh, you’re right. Somehow I never noticed this.

Wayfair would have been the biggest tax news in the tax consulting business by far if it weren’t for a certain piece of legislation passed that same year.

Those were the days. Technically you still owed sales tax and you were supposed to report it to the state yourself, but nobody did that. It was probably unavoidable that online retailers would start to collect sales tax (state governments weren't just going to give up a big revenue source), but it was nice while it lasted.

Could you get a PO box in a tax free state and then tell USPS to forward it?

This is very illegal in the US. You would have to ship it overseas from your PO box and then import it back again relying on exemptions there, which ofc has been made non-viable due to tariffs...

The question is how/if it could be enforced.

Hey, I guess Trump actually closed a tax loophole!

Been illegal long before Trump. Funnily enough I as a non-US person can buy stuff and have it shipped to my virtual address in NH without any sales tax and then sent to me overseas but people in the US get busted by the feds if they try to do the same...

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats