What If I’m Wrong, Among Other Things

He passed away earlier this week, and a good place to begin learning about him is from his Wikipedia entry.

The Conversation About Inheritance Taxes that I Would Like to Have

Are machines dystopian, or are humans dystopian? Asking for a blog post.

I am going to give this prompt to a very capable LLM. I would like you to critique this prompt, and let me know how it can be made better. Point out what is missing in terms of the comprehensiveness of my framework, as well as any details I may have missed out on. Optimize for the LLM giving an answer that holistically addresses the problem I am thinking about. We are not as interested in generating an answer to the problem as we are in generating a way to think about the problem. What the problem is will become clear upon reading my prompt. Also rate my prompt (for the parameters we’ve spoken about) on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is a poor prompt, and 10 is an excellent prompt. Please give me your reasons for the points I score, and reasons for points you have deducted.

“There has been a lot of controversy recently about whether India should, or should not have, an inheritance tax. I would like you to build out for me a framework to think through the issue. While doing so, I would like you to have a persona that has deep expertise in the global history of public finance, taxation laws, development economics, political economy and welfare economics. I would also like you to be well versed in the history of India’s taxation laws, and in India’s political economy. I would like you to assume that I am a very curious person, but with very little knowledge of economics, theoretical or applied. I like detailed explanations, but in simple English. I would like the framework to contain the following aspects, and please note that I plan to ask the LLM these questions sequentially, with plenty of scope for discussion, pushback and clarification after each question has been answered:

  1. Are there principles that underlie taxation for any economy? If yes, what are they? If not, what should a list of such principles look like?
  2. Within these principles, which will presumably be generic and applicable to all kinds of taxes, what principles might apply to inheritance taxes specifically?
  3. Should an inheritance tax be taxed while the money is still in the account(s) of the deceased individual, or the inheritor’s account? What would be better? For whom would it be better? The person being taxed or the entity doing the taxing?
  4. How should one think about the desirability of having an inheritance tax for an economy? Should it be a function of the number of people in an economy? Or their age? Or their inheritance laws?
  5. Should the state capacity of that economy have a bearing on the issue? That is, it might be all well and good to take from the rich, but does the state have the ability to spend that money effectively?
  6. Should inheritance taxes be a function of how thorough income tax laws are? For example, the higher the number of loopholes in the income tax act, the better the case for an inheritance tax is my line of thinking – is this justified?
  7. What is the history of the development of the theory surrounding inheritance taxes? What about the theory as applied to different geographies, different time periods, and countries with differing stages of development?
  8. Have countries enacted laws with sunset clauses? Why or why not?
  9. Have countries experienced Laffer Curve type problems upon implementation of inheritance taxes? How have these problems been detected, and how have they been dealt with?
  10. Based on our conversations so far, give me your top five “for” and top five “against” arguments for an inheritance tax in India today.”

Here’s Claude’s answer:

“Here’s my critique of your prompt:

Strengths:

  1. Comprehensive coverage: Your prompt covers a wide range of aspects related to inheritance taxes, including principles, implementation, history, and country-specific considerations.
  2. Persona specification: You provide clear guidelines for the LLM’s persona, which should help generate responses tailored to your needs.
  3. Sequential questioning: Breaking down the prompt into sequential questions allows for a structured and focused discussion.
  4. Encouraging discussion: You leave room for discussion, pushback, and clarification, which can lead to a more engaging and informative conversation.
  5. Specific to India: Focusing on India’s context helps narrow down the scope and generates more relevant insights.

Areas for improvement:

  1. Clarity on the target audience: While you mention that you have little knowledge of economics, it would be helpful to specify your background and the purpose of this framework (e.g., personal curiosity, policy-making, academic research).
  2. Prioritization of questions: Consider ranking the questions based on their importance or relevance to your understanding of the issue.
  3. Comparative analysis: You could include a question about comparing inheritance tax policies and their outcomes across different countries, especially those with similar characteristics to India.
  4. Societal impact: Consider adding a question about the potential social and distributional effects of inheritance taxes, such as wealth inequality and social mobility.
  5. Feasibility and alternatives: You could ask about the feasibility of implementing an inheritance tax in India given its current economic, political, and administrative context, and explore potential alternatives or complementary measures.

Missing aspects:

  1. Economic impact: Include a question about the potential economic consequences of an inheritance tax, such as its effects on savings, investment, and capital formation.
  2. Tax evasion and avoidance: Address the issue of tax evasion and avoidance strategies that may arise with inheritance taxes and how to mitigate them.
  3. Interaction with other taxes: Explore how inheritance taxes might interact with other forms of taxation, such as income, property, or gift taxes.
  4. Public opinion and political feasibility: Consider asking about public sentiment towards inheritance taxes and the political challenges in implementing such a policy.

Rating: 8/10

Reasons for the score:

  • Comprehensive coverage of key aspects
  • Clear persona specification and sequential questioning
  • Encourages discussion and focuses on India’s context

Points deducted:

  • Lack of clarity on target audience and purpose
  • Missing aspects related to economic impact, tax evasion, interaction with other taxes, and public opinion

By addressing these areas and incorporating the missing aspects, your prompt could be further strengthened to generate a more holistic and nuanced framework for thinking about inheritance taxes in India.”


Run with this framework, and please feel free to modify it and improve upon it. Please use this framework to have a discussion with an LLM about inheritance taxes. It’s the kind of discussion our ancestors were capable of having re: public policy issues.

Also, feel free to copy and improve upon the framework itself – run your prompts through an LLM to see how you can make your thinking about an issue better.

There is a discussion to be had about how the price, income and substitution effects are at play when it comes to spending time talking with folks online, or spending it talking to LLM’s, but I’d rather not go there for now.

I’ll say this much though: I’m usually quite favorably disposed to the substitution effect.

Five Articles/Posts for the 3rd of July, 2020

  1. “Accordingly, antifragile systems and organisms tend towards a common theme: bottoms-up decision-making, rather than top-down decision making. Antifragility requires real options, and real options are low-cost. Antifragility is only successful if you can actually detect, react, and grow in response to deviations from your present state in real time; the only way you can feasibly do this is for disorder detection and response to take place at a small enough resolution, and tight enough turnaround time. Top-down systems have a hard time with antifragility, because for them, all options are costly.”
    ..
    ..
    I’m late in posting this, having read this a while ago, but a useful essay by Alex Danco on how to think about anti-fragility, the term coined and popularized by Taleb. There are a lot of very useful ways to think about anti-fragility, but this essay explores immunity and how to think about our bodies immunity from the prism of anti-fragility. I found it especially useful to think about our bodies (which are at risk from the virus) and our governments (which are supposed to help us protect ourselves against the virus) and ask which is more anti-fragile, and why.
    ..
    ..
  2. Kevin Kelly (a man worth learning more about) recently posted “68 bits of unsolicited advice“. Each advice is worth reading – here’s one that is easy to understand, difficult to implement on a sustained basis. Ask me. I should know.
    ..
    ..
    “Being enthusiastic is worth 25 IQ points.”
    ..
    ..
  3. “Grades destroy curiosity. Too many kids learn for the sole purpose of raising their GPA because that’s what the system incentivizes. From an early age, I observed that my success in school depended more on my grades and less on how much I learned. In college, even though I wrote essays on my own and worked as an intern in New York City for companies like Skift, I was almost kicked out of my fraternity because my GPA was below 3.0. Likewise, my college counselors evaluated me on two metrics: grades and SAT scores. Neil deGrasse Tyson once said: “When students cheat on exams, it’s because our school system values grades more than students value learning.””
    ..
    ..
    Read this essay by David Perell. Please. Read it.
    ..
    ..
  4. This link came to me via Recommendo, which is a newsletter I have subscribed to about a month or so ago. Worth a ponder, it is about the art of critical thinking.
  5. Great visualizations, as always, from the NYT. This one is about the spread of the coronavirus in the USA.

Links for 8th May, 2019

  1. “The god question is not easy to answer conclusively because god’s existence is a matter of faith, not science. There is no mathematical proof. God is a construct of belief. The great Austrian-American mathematician Kurt Gödel once attempted to prove the existence of god. His ontological proof of god, by definition, is more axiomatic and derived from semantic logic than from real mathematics. It was not long before it was discredited and the axioms questioned. Undeterred, a group of mathematicians from around the world is using open-source documentation to formalise Gödel’s proof to a level where it can be proven by computer programs. We will wait.”
    ..
    ..
    Sachin Kalbag, a guy worth following on Twitter, writes about a near death experience he had some years ago, and asks questions about god, faith, belief and logic.
    ..
    ..
  2. “You guys are so angry and militant, you’re going to cause havoc,” he recalls being told, delivering his anecdote with a comic’s timing. “You are not getting any arms. You are not ready to fight. You are raaaaw,” he says, disintegrating into laughter. Instead of war, the 21-year-old studied economics, ending up at the University of East Anglia in England. “When all this fighting is over,” he was told, “there will be a country to run.”
    ..
    ..
    A short interview with Tito Mboweni – my only criticism is that it is too short, but then again, that’s the style of the Lunch with FT series. By the way, you might want to try Googling the series. Some extremely interesting interviews.
    ..
    ..
  3. “The first two factory acts, one in 1881 and the other in 1891, neglected to shorten working hours. When the 1890 Factory Commission gathered workers’ voices, both male and female workers overwhelmingly demanded a shorter working day. Doorpathee told the commission: ‘It will be better if the hours are shortened.’ The 1891 Factory Act declared Sunday a holiday, limited the work day to 11 hours for female workers and seven hours for child workers (aged between nine and 14). But it left out adult males from the ambit of a shorter work day, and men continued to work between 13 to 16 hours per day.”
    ..
    ..
    A truly lovely read about Bombay workers, their living conditions, and about the night schools that started in Bombay at that point of time.
    ..
    ..
  4. “In short, strange as it may seem, industrialisation of India is the soundest remedy for the agricultural problems of India. The cumulative effects of industrialisation, namely a lessening pressure (of surplus labour) and an increasing amount of capital and capital goods will forcibly create the economic necessity of enlarging the holding. Not only this, but industrialisation, by destroying the premium on land, will give rise to few occasions for its sub-division and fragmentation. Industrialisation is a natural and powerful remedy…”
    ..
    ..
    1918. Dr. Ambedkar wrote the essay from which this excerpt is taken in the year 1918. 101 years later, we still retain policies that keep people tethered to agriculture. Also worth reading is the rest of the article – and indeed, therefore the writings of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.
    ..
    ..
  5. “Sloman and Fernbach cite a survey conducted in 2014, not long after Russia annexed the Ukrainian territory of Crimea. Respondents were asked how they thought the U.S. should react, and also whether they could identify Ukraine on a map. The farther off base they were about the geography, the more likely they were to favor military intervention. (Respondents were so unsure of Ukraine’s location that the median guess was wrong by eighteen hundred miles, roughly the distance from Kiev to Madrid.)”
    ..
    ..
    Never be too confident of anything, least of all about whatever it is that you think you know, is my key takeaway from this article – but implementing this is easier said than done!