This thread was inappropriately censored by either @punkisdead@slrpnk.net or @mambabasa@slrpnk.net claiming:
“Reason: Reason: Literally the opposite of anti-work is “over employment” which OP is arguing for”
There is an English comprehension problem by the mod. Would someone whose first language is English please:
- notice that over employment is actually the problem that the thread’s thesis seeks remedies for. Being forced into a full-time or nothing ultamatim is a very common problem that oppresses anti-work proponents. It’s the single most common problem we face. Appalling that a mod would block the discussion.
- undo the improper mod action
The mod’s action to suppress is actually a pro-work action, as it prevents discussion around solutions to over-employment.
You must log in or register to comment.
Can you post a link or screenshot of the modlog to see the original text? Your link does not work for me.
Personally, I find it frustrating that an instance that is either explicitly or implicitly supportive of anarchism uses the completely unaccountable moderation model from Reddit. I don’t want to start drama with specific users but this wouldn’t be the first time I’ve seen some pretty questionable mod actions on this instance, which is disappointing, given our shared ethos. I get that we’re stuck with the tools that Lemmy provides us which are very limited but I think there has got to be a better way somehow. In my view, this system inevitably leads to abuse, especially on contentious topics.
original post text
Progressive tax regimes are conducive to anti-work philosophy, right up until you take a year or more off.
Having a progressive tax system means tax rate increases disproportionately with the more work you do. And that’s a good because working less is encouraged by a reduced avg tax rate.
But what happens when you take a year (or 5 years) off? You live off savings that were taxed in higher brackets while earning zero. IOW, consider:
- Bob works 6 years straight earning 50k/year.
- Alice works 3 years earning 100k/year then takes 3 years off.
They both had the same gross earnings per unit time but Alice gets screwed on taxes because of the progressive tax system. My pattern is comparable to Alice due to forced full-time gigs that refuse part-time. My refuge is to subject myself to being over-employed for a stretch then quitting for a stretch of bench time. The only remedies I see:
- Take a 1-year contract starting in June. Do not work the first ½ of the 1st year, and do not work the second ½ of the 2nd year.
- Form a corporation, work as independent and direct your own “false independent” 1-person company. Money builds in the company as you pay yourself the same amount whether you are working or not. (Some people put the company in Hong Kong because it accommodates this well and the company feeds the director gradually and persists well after retirement – or so I’m told)
- Work in a country that adjusts for income fluxuations by giving you a tax credit if your income drops substantially from one year to the next.
I made up number 3. Does that exist anywhere?
Any other techniques to hack around forced full-time scenarios? Or to deliberately fluxuate working hard and not working without the tax penalty?
This. We need to figure out a way to incorporate an anarchist approach to running communities and instances. In what way is a couple moderators controlling and making decisions for the userbase anarchist?
Do you have any ideas or suggestions? It would be really helpful to have a model to follow instead of trying to invent one. I tried to investigate the moderation model on /r/anarchism but I didn’t find any real information.
From what I can tell, its uncharted waters. I think there needs to be some level of accountability for moderators, what that looks like idk. But I also don’t want to be the kind of person who complains without suggesting anything, so maybe some sort of voting process to make a moderator to step down. I think it’d be a good idea to have a post that asks people for suggestions around this topic
This is my mistake, sorry about that. I saw the report and I thought it asked me to remove the post and it seemed legitimate, but as you point out, it’s not.
Edit: It has been restored. Sorry for the shortcomings on my part.
First I would lile to thank you and others for feedback regarding this. I hope anyone who does so reads the original post, the sidebar of the community and tries to understand the general spirit of that community before they comment tho.
A direct answer from myself, as I am not speaking for the other moderator of !antiwork@slrpnk.net:
Can you actually tell us what your post had to do with the abolition of work? Because thats what is outlined in the sidebar and the expectation of content there. I feel like your post really failed to connect to topic that and the votes and report(s) it received also showed this. I think another antiwork / work reform community on Lemmy would have been actual places your topic would have fit.
I stand by the decision to remove the post and I think its kinda ridiculous how out of proportion you are blowing this instance of mod action. From my perspective you are still welcome to contribute to !antiwork!antiwork@slrpnk.net as long as it is actually on topic.
Can you actually tell us what your post had to do with the abolition of work?
I’ve posted there in the past about mitigating work (incl. concepts like ”quitting” but working which just means ways to not work your ass off pleasing a boss and just working at a content pace). I posted about new work reduction laws. I never posted about full abolition of work. And I commented then that it was strange that the sidebar seems to only mention full abolition of work, and I asked if there were any objections to chatter about work reduction. There were none. And those other posts were not suppressed. So I figured the sidebar was unintentionally narrow.
I stand by the decision to remove the post and I think its kinda ridiculous how out of proportion you are blowing this instance of mod action.
The rationale in the modlog was nonsense. Now you are giving different rationale.
The rationale in the modlog was nonsense. Now you are giving different rationale.
As I said I speak for myself, not for other parties involved.
