Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

crua9 t1_j7qczo3 wrote

Reply to comment by bustedbuddha in I asked Microsoft's 'new Bing' to write me a cover letter for a job. It refused, saying this would be 'unethical' and 'unfair to other applicants.' by TopHatSasquatch

Taxes are unethical. This is stupid

4

bustedbuddha t1_j7qicaw wrote

No, they're a necessity if you're going to have currency and civilization. Meanwhile asking people for a cover letter (especially for jobs which are not about writing) is a way of asking people to do uncompensated work for you, so you can figure out who is most like you and hire them. They tend to serve to gatekeep jobs to ensure that only people who are already well off, or are already middle class, can have a reasonable chance of getting them.

−3

crua9 t1_j7qj8n6 wrote

It is unethical because

  1. no one asked to be born
  2. no square inch of this earth isn't directly controlled by a gov and they will move you around if you get rid of your citizenship
  3. a lot of what they say taxes are going for doesn't go for that. It gets moved around and screwed with. It's like the mafia collecting protection money

I can keep going

​

BTW sorry misunderstood your comment. This is likely for the downvotes btw. It sounded like you were saying asking the AI is unethical.

1

City_dave t1_j7rpf1p wrote

You're actually wrong about the square inch part. There are a few places that aren't claimed by any government.

1

crua9 t1_j7rq0ca wrote

Is it a place where someone can realistically live there? If so, where?

1

City_dave t1_j7rqeta wrote

I'm not going to do all the work for you. There is one in Europe and one in Africa and I believe a few others. What do you mean realistically live there? If you want the benefits of society you'll have to pay for them. If you want to live on your own then you are on your own. Good luck.

1

bustedbuddha t1_j7qn89u wrote

Your problems are with the particulars of who's in power. If you want to have an ordered society, which I would argue is a generally good thing even as I also think authority is a bad thing, you're going to need there to be taxes.

You have to pay for things and to an extent it's necessary for currency to have actual meaning. Of the bad ways of distributing means it is the one we've arrived that that's generally in itself not terrible.

​

(we could have an extended conversation about how someone who's philosophically inclined to anarchism could pragmatically be a Progressive (in political alignment) Liberal (in terms of structure of government) but I majored in political philosophy which rends my personal philosophy somewhat complicated.)

​

also I give no fucks about downvotes, I have plenty of Karma to spare.

−1

crua9 t1_j7qp2dg wrote

>If you want to have an ordered society

What if I don't? My point is we are forced and there is litterally no where to go on earth where you truly own yourself, what you have, and land. Note if you have to pay taxes on it or someone else can tell you what you can do with your land or whatever then you don't own it.

But that is out of scope of what I was pointing out.

2

bustedbuddha t1_j7qr7c4 wrote

As I see it, If there's no society there's nothing to prevent someone from simply forcing you to do what they want, If that's acceptable to you ethically than it is acceptable ethically for people as a whole to do it. The state of nature cannot offer freedom and in fact you do exist in that state of nature, If you choose to live according to what authority can be imposed, you can do so.

edit: to be clear this is the very basis of my stance as an Anarchist in that "society is simply forcing people to do things" is the starting point I think we should operate from. And I think a Just society can only be had if we recognize that Authority does not exist other than as the threat of violence. And I think laws/society should be written/structured in a way to maximize the freedom you describe, understanding that if we actually want to maximize justice/freedom/good there must also be economic justice and therefore complex economic structures.

1

LastInALongChain t1_j7qntuv wrote

the government is unethical, its exists to threaten people at the point of violence into following the rules (laws) the country lays out.

What if I want to do heroin for the rest of my life? Why is that unethical? Its unhealthy, but its ultimately my choice. Its illegal because it would make me a drain on government systems and unable to provide tax income or contribute to the economy. To that end the state would choose to enslave me via incarceration if I chose to disobey.

You can say the gov't is necessary to make society function, but it is ultimately unethical.

0

bustedbuddha t1_j7s8ih5 wrote

I agree, I lay out a similar starting point in a different reply. A government is seemingly the only way to have society, but as the font of authority it existence is implicitly the threat of violence for those who don't conform.

2