site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2mo ago (text post)   30008 thread views

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
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Ask them for a cash discount. If they don't offer one up front, which they often do. I suspect the smarter ones are offering an X% cash discount and recording an X+N% cash discount, and the dumber ones are just not recording the payment at all.

and the dumber ones are just not recording the payment at all.

I don't know anything about taxes, why are they the dumber ones?

I imagine it looks more suspicious in an audit to have records (phone, email, etc.) that you performed a job but never got paid for it vs. getting paid (but only recording a fraction of what you were actually paid).

Wait a second. Audits mean the government gets to sift through all your communications???

I suppose they only have the right to see email accounts and phone records of your business, not you personally?

As best I know an audit has nothing to do with sifting through your phone and email.

In tax audits, more often than not they take your business records at face value. They usually are just checking that you calculated tax correctly and have support for your figures. You're in deep shit and probably messed something up badly if they have suspicions about the veracity of your purchase orders and statements of work.

In financial audits...yeah you shouldn't have records of work that you've done with no recorded revenue to match. Your revenue would fail something called the completeness assertion.

This is a thinly veiled ad for some service that tracks your location for tax residency purposes, but it looks like they can subpeona all sorts of things:

https://blog.monaeo.com/when-the-tax-auditor-subpoenas-your-cell-phone-records

It's too obvious. If an auditor comes in there will be obvious tells if a fair number of jobs just aren't recorded, like too many supply purchases. Presumably a good enough financial wizard could hide most of this as well, but it will be difficult. On the other hand, figuring out that the amount of cash discount is usually overstated would be much harder to find.

If they don't offer one up front, which they often do.

Although I think it's best to leave this one until the end. When the work is done, fix the price as if there are no discounts. Only once the price is firm do you then bring up discounts.

Otherwise you get the situation where they say "Oh, that's WITH the cash discount" when you go to pay.

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