this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2026
505 points (93.2% liked)

You Should Know

45656 readers
1015 users here now

YSK - for all the things that can make your life easier!

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with YSK.

All posts must begin with YSK. If you're a Mastodon user, then include YSK after @youshouldknow. This is a community to share tips and tricks that will help you improve your life.



Rule 2- Your post body text must include the reason "Why" YSK:

**In your post's text body, you must include the reason "Why" YSK: It’s helpful for readability, and informs readers about the importance of the content. **



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-YSK posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-YSK posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

If you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- The majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Rule 11- Posts must actually be true: Disiniformation, trolling, and being misleading will not be tolerated. Repeated or egregious attempts will earn you a ban. This also applies to filing reports: If you continually file false reports YOU WILL BE BANNED! We can see who reports what, and shenanigans will not be tolerated. We are not here to ban people who said something you don't like.

If you file a report, include what specific rule is being violated and how.



Partnered Communities:

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

Credits

Our icon(masterpiece) was made by @clen15!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BillyClark@piefed.social 89 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Plus, the implication that your taxes should only pay for services that you personally use, or even for services that you might use, is just plain uncivilized.

Some people have that situation, for example, where they can choose whether to pay for fire services, and if they don't and their house catches fire, the fire department won't do anything except protect neighboring houses that have paid for it.

It's pretty backwards for modern sensibilities.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

Some taxes are fairly generic, like income tax or property tax. However some are specifically targeted, intentionally or not.

Too many people believe their gas taxes pay for road maintenance (on average in US less than half) so react in outrage when someone proposes other transportation needs, such as rail or bike lanes, or react in outrage at the idea of EVs not paying their fair share.

We should

  1. replace the gasoline tax with a carbon tax on gasoline, so it pays for the environmental damage
  2. Pay for transportation maintenance in a more inclusive way, perhaps cars can pay annually based on weight and mileage. Or for simplicity and privacy perhaps a fixed fee on annual registration. This would be fair for EV vs ice cars, and non-car owners don’t pay
[–] RebekahWSD@lemmy.world 31 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My property taxes go overwhelmingly to the school (well like 52 percent where nothing else is close to that big) and I'll never have kids.

I like the kids educated that do exist though! Like damn we need them educated!

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 5 points 1 day ago

but still gets underfunded somehow.

[–] hateisreality@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

I don't have kids why the hell should I pay for schools......wellml because I like living in an educated society, helló I'll never bep upset I'm paying for (real actual scientifically and primary source-backed) education.

[–] sweetiesweetie@lemmy.today -4 points 1 day ago

Fire services aren't giving people lung cancer omg.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Right? I don't have kids but I'm happy my property tax funds schools.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago

The only thing is I’m getting awfully cynical on that. Sure, I’m all in to approve any tax increase for education, but is it really for that? The cynic in me wonders if politicians tend to shuffle the budget around so education appears to be in need. People are more likely to pay for education but are less likely to approve tax increases for other uses

[–] SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Ah, but facilities used to drive a car are private goods, in that they are rivalrous and potentially excludable. Only one car can occupy a given space at a time, and we can (and do) charge for their use. Education, on the other hand, is a public good, non-rivalrous and non-exclusive. They are not the same, and there are good reasons to fund one with tax money, and not the other.

[–] protist@retrofed.com 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

A ton of public services use roads. Actually, literally all public services use roads. School buses use roads to bring children to school. The post office uses roads, as do firefighters and EMS. So does your electric service, waste collection, and water service

[–] sweetiesweetie@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago

So? those are a tiny fraction of the total use and if it was only used by those who really need it we would need a tiny fraction of the budget to repair them

[–] SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, and? All of those public services rely on private goods to operate, e.g. vehicles, fuel, wages, et cetera. All of those are rolled in to the cost of providing the service, so there's no reason that use of the basic vehicle infrastructure could not also be included. It would help eliminate deadweight loss, in fact.

[–] protist@retrofed.com 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I have no idea what sort of model you're advocating for here

[–] SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip 2 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Fair. I'm advocating removing all subsidies for private motor vehicles, so that we have a user-pays system, including the cost of negative externalities, like pollution, carbon emissions, and human health impacts, through taxes and registration fees (or similar). This would price the true cost of transportion into goods and services, which would lead to an economically optimal amount of driving. Undoubtedly we'd choose to drive much less, which would have lots of knock-on benefits for individuals and local communities.

[–] protist@retrofed.com 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ok. What would that realistically look like? How does your plan account for the significantly higher cost burden that would be born by people who are lower income, given they're less likely to be able to afford fuel-efficient vehicles? And how do you account for EVs, or variability in carbon emissions?

Regardless, we're talking about funding for roads, which is a related but totally separate issue from everything else I just mentioned. Roads are a public service, and I'm vehemently against the libertarian idea of "pay per use" you're advocating

[–] sweetiesweetie@lemmy.today -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

no you want taxpayers to subsidies your convenience because you're too fat to take the train

[–] protist@retrofed.com 4 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

Engaging with the argument would be a better look than yelling derogatory things. And it's spelled "subsidize"

[–] sweetiesweetie@lemmy.today 0 points 22 hours ago

Car drivers had 50 years to change their habits. Now they destroyed the earth. Time to payback

[–] sweetiesweetie@lemmy.today 0 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

Cars gave me a neurological disease. Car drivers should pay for their crime. If i were in charge i'd send them to gulag

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Given that car drivers currently overpay for road maintenance and trucking underpays you would see the opposite effect, where people are encouraged to use smaller vehicles.

Costs would rise for everyone, impacting the poorest.

Suddenly the BMW drivers who currently overpay and have been subsidising roads for non-drivers is saving money and the pensioner who doesn’t drive has increased food and medicine costs.

There’s a reason the costs are spread the way they are. It’s a form of effective socialism.

[–] sweetiesweetie@lemmy.today -1 points 1 day ago

Exatly. I don't drive, Im sick of my taxes going to some highway so some fatzo can sit on his pollution machine because he's bothered by trains.

[–] BillyClark@piefed.social -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Local buses are a public service run by a municipality or transit authority, generally, but are still a private good. They're rivalrous (only one butt per seat), and excludable (can't ride if you don't pay). This is clearer with inter-city buses, which are operated by private corporations.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago

the public transportation in the west coast has been largely getting rid of seats since they can force more people to stand per area than sitting around.