[ad_1]
Eliezer Yudkowsky as soon as described a psychological trick referred to as a “semantic stopsign.” That is when somebody proposes a solution to query in a method meant to terminate additional inquiry. As he places it, a semantic cease signal “isn’t a propositional assertion, a lot as a cognitive site visitors sign: don’t suppose previous this level.” He provides an instance of how the potential of new expertise permitting us to change our biology raises all types of questions for the long run – and an acquaintance of his who makes use of “democracy” because the proposed resolution to all the points raised. Yudkowsy says:
That’s it. That’s his reply. When you ask the plain query of “How properly have liberal democracies carried out, traditionally, on issues this difficult?” or “What if liberal democracy does one thing silly?” then you definately’re an autocrat, or libertopian, or in any other case a really very dangerous particular person. Nobody is allowed to query democracy.
The important thing sign that a solution serves as a semantic cease signal isn’t the reply itself – it’s whether or not the reply is supposed to function a blocking mechanism from asking the following apparent query. Real solutions facilitate additional dialog, whereas semantic cease indicators stop it.
One frequent semantic cease signal I see as of late comes when asking the sorts of people who find themselves inclined to help the proposals of Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren about how the applications these Senators suggest will probably be funded. The frequent reply is “tax the wealthy!”, or one thing like “we’ll make billionaires pay their fair proportion!”
However what’s the following apparent query? How a lot extra cash can actually be introduced in by “taxing the wealthy” or “making billionaires pay their fair proportion”? And would that be sufficient to pay for the proposed insurance policies?
Let’s begin with one thing raised in 2019 by the economist Antony Davies when he pointed out the next:
The 550 US billionaires collectively are price $2.5 trillion. If we confiscated 100% of their wealth, we’d elevate sufficient to run the federal authorities for lower than 8 months. Maybe our downside isn’t how a lot billionaires have however how a lot politicians spend.
Politifact reexamined this declare in 2021 and rated it as “largely true.” As they put it, “The 2 figures are outdated [as of 2021, when the post went viral], however the thrust of the declare is correct: The estimated $5 trillion in wealth of the nation’s billionaires is sufficient to cowl about eight months price of federal spending.”
Even this overstates how a lot mileage you might get from such a transfer. Elon Musk could also be price $225 billion in the mean time, however that doesn’t imply he has $225 billion sitting in his checking account. That quantity is overwhelmingly made up of the worth of his inventory holdings within the numerous corporations he owns, together with different property like bonds, land, residence fairness, and so forth. If the federal government needed to take all of Musk’s wealth to finance present spending, that may require Musk to massively dump property, which might drive down the costs of all these property and trigger a lot lower than $225 billion to be recovered.
However it will get worse than that. Even in the event you seized all of the wealth of all billionaires, and even in the event you made the extremely unrealistic assumption that you might in actual fact get the complete worth of these property within the course of, that may solely cowl what the federal government is presently spending for a handful of months. However the City Institute estimated that Elizabeth Warren’s well being care plan would require $34 trillion {dollars} in further authorities spending over the following 10 years. $34 trillion over 120 months comes out to over $280 billion per 30 days. In 2023, Forbes estimated that the web price of all US billionaires was $4.5 trillion – decrease than what Politifact present in 2021, as Forbes notes greater than half of billionaires have been price lower than the earlier 12 months. Let’s be beneficiant and spherical that again as much as $5 trillion. At $280 billion per 30 days, seizing 100% of all the worth of billionaire property and (unrealistically) preserving all that worth within the course of would cowl the extra spending Warren’s plan requires for lower than a 12 months and a half.
And it’s even worse than it sounds at first look. Wealth is a inventory, however spending is a circulate. The worth constructed up by rich People represents a cumulative course of that spans many many years. Which means that in the event you utterly tapped the billionaire properly dry to run Warren’s program, you may’t simply repeat that course of once more 16 months down the street to maintain issues going. You may seize all of Musk or Buffet’s wealth, however you may solely do that after. Grandiose plans like these put forth by Warren and Sanders merely can’t be funded by going after billionaires and even simply “the wealthy” – and anybody who provides that reply is probably going caught in a semantic cease signal.
[ad_2]
Source link
