Hacker News Reader

Comment by Atreiden | Hacker News Reader

So this is a huge problem, and one worth tackling, but I worry very much about the timing of this post in the context of the bill being brought before the Senate now.

We should not implement horrific legislation just because we agree with a single provision. Calling your representatives is the right path, but you MUST be explicit that you do not support the current bill being brought forth that addresses this.

Here are a few pieces for context, if you're not informed about what's in this bill: https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/5339440-the-big-beautifu... https://archive.is/No4o9

Please, I beseech my fellow Americans, do not vocalize any support for this bill. We'll correct the ills of the 2017 administration in time, but this is not the way to do that.

View on HN

> We'll correct the ills of the 2017 administration in time

How? We have - at times - had democrats in charge since 2017 and they did nothing to resolve this either. We appear to be waiting for flying pigs.

So because this is something we can do now and we want to do something now, we do this?

Supporting this is making a deal with the devil because he offered you two bottles of whiskey.

Its penny-wise and pound-foolish.

I hadn't seen they were asking for a retroactive carveout! For eight years. A decade's worth of massive, post facto tax clawback? I don't know who thought this was a good idea, but they really must not love YC or Hacker News, to put those names on the public face of this...

While the law with the tax change was passed in 2017, that specific change didn't go into effect until 2022. So it's 3 years of retroactive carveouts (2022, 2023, 2024).

The opposite of what you're saying is "perfection is the enemy of progress", so let's move past them. I'm asking for more than "this is not the way". What is the way? How will we do this? This is critical, and we've failed to do anything since early 2022. Democrats are clearly not at all interested. My (Dem) congressman responded directly to my enquiry with "fixing section174 just wouldn't be good optics". I agree republicans can't be taken very seriously either if OB3 is the highest of highs. But we all want this fixed. So: how?

Not in a way that makes us even easier to hate, for a start. You really want a big noisy political carveout in what is already being called the largest upward wealth transfer in history? You want to find out what it's like to be in a line of work that has the reputation for having to steal from the American people to survive? We have enough of that reputation already.

If you want a better answer, tell me who our friends are in Congress this decade, and how much it matters. From what I see, the answers are "few" and "little." The Americans who don't blame us for giving Trump the country blame us for not giving him enough of a platform. The appearance of demanding favor on our part at such a moment seems unwise, but that moment does sufficiently explain why we find ourselves facing the aforementioned paucity of well-wishers.

>Not in a way that makes us even easier to hate, for a start. You really want a big noisy political carveout in what is already being called the largest upward wealth transfer in history? You want to find out what it's like to be in a line of work that has the reputation for having to steal from the American people to survive? We have enough of that reputation already.

This is bullshit. The carveout already exists and it's designed to attack software engineering specifically.

This is politics. Perceptions matter. Changing the status quo is more difficult because it is the status quo, and that also matters.

If you want to sell this change, the way to do it is to hammer on the fact that it was Trump's own TCJA that created the current situation, or that it was the machinations of a hostile Congress that so perverted the original intent of the TCJA, depending on audience. But even that is not likely to work, not in a post-"Twitter Files," post-Careless People world.

I don't know what kind of bubble you live in but if I were working this year I wouldn't be super comfortable talking about it, the same way if I had previously made the mistake of buying a Tesla I would by now have unloaded the damned eyesore even at a loss.

No one is upset to see us suffer. If you think that should change, fine. Complaining at me about it won't achieve that. I did not ask how you think things should be. I'm telling you how things are.

I don’t know what bubble you’re living in but the “narrative” here is easily defensible. “The software engineering profession has been gutted by layoffs that explicitly make them 5x more expensive to startups than lawyers, electrical engineers, and doctors. This hurts both workers and employers while benefiting nobody other than foreign firms.”

Nobody of relevance is mad people in tech get paid well. The only slice who are is a small percentage of people in housing constrained areas who attribute the housing failures of California to 5% of the SF workforce.

> I'm telling you how things are.

Claiming something is “how things are” is just assuming the conclusion and is one of the dumbest ways to engage in discussion. It’s literally, “I’m just telling you how I’m right.”

Okay, now I know what kind of bubble you live in.

Except in 2024 when the house passed a bill that included repealing it.

It didn't become law (no 60 votes in senate), after Schumer sat on it for 6 (!) months. And there were earlier attempts to fix this, for example at the end of 2022 using budget/reconciliation - like what the Reps are doing here; but that was blocked by progressives because of "bad optics".

The Democratic party needs internal reform, that much seems clear to me. But since then we've had just a single term of Biden, and his administrations focus was on COVID, Ukraine, and getting CHIPS+infra bills passed.

It takes time to undo damage codified into legislation. We're still dealing with the aftermath of Reagan. But we have to stop the bleeding and take Congress back, or the size of the hill we have to scale increases drastically.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com