On Voting

How to capture more of your tax monies in the long-term

“Humankind is in a race between learning to be systems thinkers and stumbling blindly towards mass extinction.”

— Eric Beinhocker, Institute of New Economic Thinking

Do you decide on the party to vote for by selecting the one that promises the least face-value tax-rate?

Perhaps you don’t trust the State to allocate your capital efficiently, or fear that you have already contributed more than your fair share. While these seem valid reasons to keep [more of] your money, using a one-dimensional heuristic like tax-rate may leave you poorer in the long-term.

Here are some questions to help with a more holistic math:

How to read diagrams below?

0. What is ‘truly’ your output metric?

You may spend the money you save from the reduced taxes on goods and services that bring you joy. But, the ability to enjoy the said g & s is also contingent on other factors that are at a scale beyond your singular control, like:

• Availability and access to clean air, water, and agricultural output

For example, climate change can cause flooding, heat waves, hurricanes, fires etc. that you cannot meaningfully counter by buying yachts and air-conditioners.

• Protection from the elements, disease, violence etc.

For example, pandemics can cause food shortages and death by infection. You cannot invent a vaccine or suddenly grow a variety of food in your basement.

So, the metric to optimize for is: the savings you are able to capture. If the party you vote for is giving you a tax discount at the cost of other factors, then it’s likely a net negative for you.

1. Does your chosen party support Science?

It may seem odd to ask this question 300 years after the of ‘Age of Enlightenment’, but check for signals that confirm the party’s support for science:

• Do they listen to scientists?
• Are their policies evidence-based?
• Do they allocate a healthy proportion of the budget to R&D?

If the answers to any of the above is ‘No’, then your savings from the alleged tax discount may have already evaporated.

We have been able to improve our collective average life expectancy at birth from ~30 to ~80 years over the last 300 years. This was no accident. We achieved this by using the scientific method to understand our world and investing in science based solutions like medicine, technology, social policy.

Bringing a party that doesn’t believe in science to power is literally like walking back on the lines in the chart below, and shaving years off your life.

Also, the innovation propelled by science not only improves life expectancy (through medicine etc.) and its quality (through products that make life easy), but also increases the size of the economic pie (through new products and services) thus requiring a smaller slice from you in the form of taxes in the future. So, supporting a party that supports science, puts money back in your pocket.

2. Does your chosen party support Education?

By “education”, I mean providing students the tools to:

(i) appreciate, challenge, and improve upon existing scientific studies

(ii) make good decisions using the scientific method

(ii) build products and services that make life better

“Support” can mean some proportion of:

(i) Providing free education to all

(ii) Incentivizing everyone to get educated

(iii) Empowering educators with the needed tools and incentives

Free education not only (i) reduces the financial burden on you, but when the general public is more educated they (ii) are less likely to commit crime thus increasing your life expectancy, and (iii) are likely to make better decisions on using public resources, thus saving more for you. The educated populace is also more likely to participate in the economy thus (iv) improving your quality of life thorough more product and services, and (v) reducing the need to tax you in the future.

Effect of school construction on long-term indices [Source]

Investing in public education is really a no-brainer, that (like supporting science) puts money back in your pocket. So, vote for a party that is likely to do more in this area.

3. Does your party support Public Health?

“Support” can mean some proportion of:

(i) Proving free healthcare to all

(ii) Keeping a check on prices of medicines and procedures

(iii) Investing in R&D (healthcare, biology, medicine etc.)

The COVID-19 pandemic has been a stark reminder that one’s personal health has a heavy relationship with public health. These network effects existed even before the current pandemic on a variety of health indices.

Similar to the previous point on education, State‘s focus on healthcare not only (i) reduces the financial burden on you, if you were to be in an unfortunate situation, but also provides you (ii) protection from potential pandemics by not letting them spread, thus directly improving your life expectancy. Also, a healthier populace can better participate in the economy thus (iii) improving your quality of life thorough more product and services, and (iv) reducing the need to tax you in the future.

***

These are just frameworks. On a sliding scale of “possible” short-term improvement in your bank balance and long-term happiness of the planet, you will have to pick a point based on the options available to you. But, do base these decisions on a systems view. Thanks!