[tl]

Which means your cries for privacy only apply for rich people and you're okay with that because you have some money.

[raverbashing]

With the risk of sounding a bit redundant: privacy is important for private stuff

But if by law something needs to be known by the government: just go for it

A silly analogy: your medical info is private, but it's in your best interest that a condition like 'diabetic' or 'allergic to something' have a lower level of privacy

[bee_rider]

> With the risk of sounding a bit redundant: privacy is important for private stuff

> But if by law something needs to be known by the government: just go for it

This seems a bit flipped, the only reason something needs to be provided to the government “by law” is that we’ve passed a law that says it needs to be. That it is required by law is not a reason for it being required of course, that’s circular. The reason the law was passed is because we decided it was in the public interest for the government to collect that data.

If we decided it was in the public interest to collect more income info about wealthy people, then we could make that required by law. I think the comment you responded to is suggesting that we should change what is required by law.

Your analogy is better. There’s a reason you might be ok with less privacy there.