Wealth Tax

I am against any wealth tax. The revenue services for many governments are very focused on not blocking economic growth, and then periodically taking a reasonable amount of wealth.

In the end, only wealth can be taxed (things that aren't physical can't be seized and auctioned). However, I don't want to be forced to let someone into my house to calculate how much stuff I have.

In general, I think it’s more reasonable to monitor wealth moving (and more so if wealth moves between people) rather than to force people to cooperate with monitoring wealth staying in the same place. I don’t want someone checking up on whether I own the same stock certificates or gold bars each year; that seems like an insult to my dignity.

Enforcement Complications

Distribution

The top 10% as a whole pays 71.22%, while the bottom 50% of taxpayers account for only 2.89% of all income taxes.

I don't think that focusing on people who already pay a disproportionate amount of tax will be very helpful. Rapidly changing what is taxed (wealth vs income) would probably be harmful, as people will probably have trouble adapting to significantly different policies. For example, we'd probably hear about people who happen to have inherited expensive houses being unable to pay thousands of dollars for tax bills, after thinking that they wouldn't be affected by policy changes.

Avoidance

If there was a wealth tax and I was rich enough to spend a lot of time managing my money, I would just create a "charitable organization" that I and my family completely control, then have it pay people to do things I would want them to do anyway, and maybe even try to let the charity pay a high wage to its managers (such that I could be a manager and get the charity to pay for my yearly living expenses, directly or indirectly). I also might be able to get away with using a trust or charitable remainder trust to avoid being affected by a wealth tax.

I don't know the degree to which tax exempt organizations affect my life, but I do know that trusts have a relevant affect on my life, since they are often used to own land, specifically by landlords of housing and by people who own land that is worth a lot of money. How they are dealt with would probably have to significantly change in order to accommodate a wealth tax.

Inheritance Tax

I'm not sure I'm against inheritance tax, but it might be an unnecessary complication. Treating inheritance like a gift from one person to another at the moment of their death might make things easier for everyone. The policies regarding gifts are relatively clear: https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/gift-tax https://www.irs.gov/faqs/capital-gains-losses-and-sale-of-home/property-basis-sale-of-home-etc/property-basis-sale-of-home-etc

However, having separate inheritance law might also make things less painful for some people. If my assets suddenly gained or lost a large amount of value just before I died, I wouldn't want that to justify taking more wealth from my heirs. Having a special way to value assets gained due to someone dying might be more reasonable than treating each receipt as a gift.

Maybe a more appropriate practice is to only engage with a Contributor License Agreement if the repository one contributes to is already available with the GNU AGPL or one is actually in control of some money the person one contracts with will gain due to one's changes. For example:

• Before I contribute to a project, I should make a copy of as many relevant repositories I'm able to and ensure each one is easy to redistribute, and only make changes to my copies. That way, I can continue distributing the improved software if a person I engage in a CLA with does something I don't like later, but they are still able to apply any change of mine to a repository that gets more attention (thus helping more people). Also, I might get money (as an employee) for doing this, which would prevent that money from being used against the Free Software Movement.
• If I were a board member, manager, or employee and someone engaged in a CLA with an entity I have influence over, I have a good chance to direct more money to support the Free Software Movement (or block dealing with a person where doing so would be harmful).

If I have already fixed a software issue, made it clear what license should be used with my change, and made it available to the public, I wouldn't necessarily be against engaging in a CLA (though I might ask to be paid to do so since I wouldn't normally go out of my way to manually sign things, and I do value my time).

FYI I can navigate to https://blog.hansenpartnership.com/why-microsoft-is-a-good-steward-for-github/ from https://drewdevault.com/2018/10/05/Dont-sign-a-CLA.html (using https://blog.hansenpartnership.com/gpl-as-the-best-licence-governance-and-philosophy/ for an intermediary step), so I'm a little suspicious about the author's thoughts on these matters. I also didn't find any useful information about the GNU Affero General Public License from the same author, and I consider the GNU AGPL to be important based on https://ploum.net/2024-07-01-opensource_sustainability.html and https://lemmy.world/post/16602135

It seems there was a pre-existing agreement to use the GNU GPL with Forgejo, and it seems to me that the GNU AGPL is not compatible with the GNU GPL.

There is more discussion about that around https://codeberg.org/forgejo/discussions/issues/201

I'm assuming that there has been some resistance to using the GNU AGPL with Forgejo (it seems the discussions about licenses has been contentious), and the GNU GPL seems to have been discussed much more than the GNU AGPL. It was probably overwhelmingly likely that we would get Forgejo with the GNU GPL rather than the GNU AGPL. I would have preferred that the GNU AGPL was used instead, but I'm not going to worry about it much since I probably can't change this situation for the better.

This URL might help you (I see it linked from the URL of this post): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft

If it doesn't, I suggest looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold

https://giveupgithub.org/

https://giveupgithub.org/

*(char*)0 = 0; - What Does the C++ Programmer Intend With This Code? - JF Bastien - C++ on Sea 2023

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFIqNZ8VbRY

This helped me: https://nutritionsource.hsph.harvard.edu/what-should-you-eat/

An overarching question

You should probably discuss boundary setting with someone you trust. This situation might be only one part of a broader issue with your relationship with your parents, and you can probably make that relationship more beneficial and less detrimental.

Moving out

Once you are legally and financially able to, you could move out (or take action to improve your financial situation to make it more likely you'll be able to do so in the future). Distance can allow a relationship to change to your benefit. It seems that the majority of adults in the wealthiest countries don't live with their parents: http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/5908feb9fcd8eb1e008b4681-1200/young-adults-living-at-home.png https://64.media.tumblr.com/42facc68776260a335473a2553bb7f59/410ac9df6d9c28a0-9f/s1280x1920/8be58d13087dc686c9edcab713f63fc4c538e99a.jpg

The law

Note that, unless you have another reason to not want to be around your parents, I doubt that involving a state institution (like child protective services, a police department, a prosecutor's office) in your relationship with your parents will be helpful. Knowing relevant laws is more useful to better understand what is socially accepted behavior, and to be able to know what public institutions are available to help you if you find yourself in a situation where they're likely to be helpful.

Also, consider whether it's appropriate to tell other people you know about this situation. If you do choose to discuss this with other people, I would follow an escalation procedure so that information doesn't need to spread farther than necessary (for example, tell friends first, then if you don't see improvement tell adults that live near you, then if you don't see improvement tell adults in positions of responsibility (like teachers), and so on).

Privacy

You could inform your parents that state institutions might become involved if they cause you to be recorded while in your bedroom without your consent:

in many places, it is indeed illegal to put cameras in your child's room without their knowledge or consent.

property owners face some limitations when attempting to install cameras throughout a rental property. All cameras must be visible; hidden or spy cameras are not permissible in a tenant’s residence. Similarly, CCTV cameras are forbidden in bathrooms, bedrooms, toilets, and other private areas throughout a rented unit.

These quotes are discussing cameras, but I expect the same laws and principles apply to audio recordings.

If you receive mail to an address and are an adult, I expect you have rights similar to that of a tenant.

Money

It seems your parents cannot force you to buy anything, and surely not an amazon echo. They may have a right to receive money you gained as a compensation for services (as wages) during minority for some reason, but otherwise what is yours is yours, and your parents should only use what is yours in order to promote your interests (like your health, security, and so on), and probably they should only do that when it's necessary (in situations where there is a clear and urgent need).

You may want to ensure you have deposited any money you have acquired into a bank account you own (so there is a record of how long you had it, so it would be more questionable if they tried to claim it isn't yours). It might also be useful to use a separate bank account to receive and account for wages (since it seems there are special exceptions for wages, so keeping clear records of what money is wages and what is not might be useful), and it might be useful to have a UTMA custodial account (like one described at https://www.fidelity.com/learning-center/personal-finance/custodial-account-for-kids) (to enable making it even more clear what property has been transferred to you) (note that this does allow a custodian to use the property, but only for your benefit) (note you probably can't "transfer" money to yourself, so any money you already acquired should probably be managed without using a UTMA or UGMA account).

A community named like "Ask Lemmy" would probably be most useful to get questions answered, like !asklemmy@lemmy.world or !asklemmy@lemm.ee

There probably aren't enough people with historian questions to have enough questions to get people checking a community every day/week, so questions on that or any other specific topic would probably get seen by more people by just making a post in an "Ask Lemmy" community. However, !askhistorians@lemmy.world exists with 10 posts since 28 June 2023! I expected to not find such a community or for it to have significantly fewer posts.

You can also search specifically for communities, comments, users, etc.: https://sh.itjust.works/search?q=Ask&type=Communities&listingType=All&page=1&sort=TopAll

There is also !whatisthisthing@lemmy.world and other "what is" communities, which would be more useful for that specific type of question.

Perhaps politics being hard to understand or interact with is a sign the system of politics should be replaced.

It seems the first time PR was used was in 1855. Canada and the USA are late (it seems that most of the places I'd be okay with living use proportional representation), but catching up sooner would be better than catching up later!

I'll draw a parallel to another revolution: supposedly only two wars were fought to end slavery, in the USA and Haiti (everywhere else seems to have banned slavery with just legislation and compensation, for example in Britain), and I'd rather keep the number of wars over proportional representation at 0 rather than risking having a higher number, so advocating emphatically is important regardless of circumstances.