RE: I'm not important.
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
Honestly, I think part of the problem is the computerization of everything. Don't get me wrong, computers have increased efficiency dramatically, but programs are often not created with an ability to deal with edge cases or exceptions.
In the past where someone may add additional information on a paper form, there is often no room for comments or online forms will not process if specific drop down boxes can't be completed.
The problem with tax-evading billionaires is that they spend incredible amounts of money on legal teams that deliberately delay, delay, delay proceedings so that governments simply cannot afford to prosecute rich tax evaders, they can literally only afford to go after small businesses... when the US cuts the IRS budget, it's the working class that suffers.
I'm not sure I quite understand the computation argument. I don't think either way exceptions are made, as they're not covered by the rules, and every bureaucrat has to be able to justify their doings with rules. That is not easy, even if they wanted to.
And absolutely true on the tax evaders. But that, too, is a result of creating too many addenda to the law, being introduced to cover exceptions or loopholes, but in the end give a lot more options to delay a process.
The computerization basically prevents edge cases and exceptions from either coming to light... or maybe just getting deprioritized.
Say, 50 years ago, if a mother stole away her child to another country, the father could report it to police, and they'd write it all down and go through their processes.
Now, you might make a police report, they write it down, but when they computerize it, your situation doesn't fit into their system properly (because it's unusual) so they don't know how to process it... or they put it all in properly, but because it's unusual it gets depriorized.
Maybe there is a law saying that a mother gets more rights over the children than a father, in case there isn't much you can do except organize to change the law... but more likely the laws say that no one can kidnap a child, but your case gets depriorized or lost in their systems because it's not neat or usual.
I don't think I've explained this well, my point is that the laws are just one piece of the puzzle, but the implementation and enforcement of laws is another massive piece of the puzzle that often gets missed.
That makes more sense now, thanks for taking the time to explain! I honestly don't think that it's any different now than then, at least in the result. The process, yes. It's a lot easier to track somebody down these days, though. And police are a lot better connected. It's just the will that is missing. If bureaucrats know that it's a lot of work, it falls of the desk. I wouldn't blame computerization for that, just common human laziness.