should there be extra investor accounts that are automatically credited with the curation?
I see no need for there to be an extra account. And transferring to another account would affect nothing.
I proposed for those who might oppose someone being able to still post the option to stop posting for 24 hours from claim in wallet, but personally don't see the need.
If others wish to reward someone who is selfish with their stake because they appreciate the contribution that person makes is in my opinion between those voting their own stake and the recipient, regardless of what the recipient does with their stake. It's not my stake to decide whether others have the right to allocate to another because it doesn't fit my preferences.
I would use authors, or artists or film directors as an example.
They are rewarded due to appreciation for what they have manifested for others. I view our blogs here in the same light. Those who create words/thoughts or pictures etc that others find beneficial have a place here to be rewarded that is independent of their level of community participation, in the same way I don't expect an author like Steven King to be my friend for me to buy(reward) and read his work. I don't expect him to perform other actions to qualify for my reading and consumption of his efforts I sought to enjoy.
To clarify on Steven King, merely using him as an example. I only enjoyed his very early work, hahaha.
My thought is, if we automatically distribute both Curation and Author Rewards to the Wallets, then the reward pool would be empty. With this we could then also disable the upvote button, from an empty pool there is nothing left to distribute.
That sounds like the Splash system Jacob was talking about. I hope it doesn't go that way myself as I would have to become a passive investor due to tax complications/liabilities. Let me explain.
Currently based on U.S. tax law, what I receive is considered income. I pay taxes on it as such.
After that, then when it leaves my possession it's considered either a short or long term capital gains. Anything one holds for less than one year becomes a short term capital gain and is taxed at 50% of profit realized. Over one year is a long term capital gain which is then taxed at 20% of profit realized.
Under that system I would be liable twice immediately, once for collecting as income, again for tipping as a capital gains tax if that is what you mean. I would find myself unable and unwilling to create so much short term capital gains tax coupled with an additionally insane amount of record keeping. I'm already spending about 20 minutes per day in record keeping as it is, and I need to spend several hours in the coming weeks to collect values to get prepared for my tax liability as income on Blurt for last year. I simply don't have the time nor the desire to owe more in taxes under that form of system, and it would defeat a large part of what makes Blurt (and previous Hive and Steemit) magic for myself.
Under the current system, I'm not taxed on the half of my vote that goes to another, because it never enters into my possession. So I can help others, or show appreciation for others without it being a tax event for myself.
That's part of why despite my argument for allowing investors to collect 100% of a self vote in the wallet, I personally wouldn't be using it. I believe that there is more value in voting others, and appreciate the ability to do so without making me a victim of taxation by the greedy people who rule my country. There is a reason no exchange of volume worth trading on will accept residents of my country.
I believed your idea was to give investors both Curation and Author Rewards. I guess I misunderstood that then.
Your understanding was correct. What I wasn't proposing was taking the current ability of voting away from those of us who are more community minded and enjoy sharing our claims with others. I believe there is room here at Blurt for both community minded and purely greed driven minded, and that adding the option for the greed minded will benefit all of us from an increased demand for Blurt forcing a rise in valuation as more become willing to become passive investors.
As I mentioned, those of us who are more community minded will grow much quicker as we are building relationships with others of like mind, and redirecting portions of our claim to others without it being a tax event as your addition would create.
I wasn't pitching for this to be forced on all, just an addition for those who would invest without the time sink those like us prefer. Under a tipping system as proposed for Splash and I believe by you in your idea onto mine, I suddenly am burdened with a lot more record keeping and suddenly the tax burden for what is now not mine.
I already told Jacob if and when Splash might become reality, by necessity I can not afford to act in the same way as I do here, because for every coin I give away I'll owe a coin in taxes.
It's difficult for me to come up with the taxes I already have to pay, as I've never cashed a crypto into fiat to this day. I believe last year my increase in tax penalty for Hive was a couple hundred dollars, and I'm foreseeing my taxes that will classified as income in a few months for Blurt from last year will probably add an additional perhaps 1000.00 onto my tax bill, which I will have to come up with out of my pocket as I don't wish to power down that amount and sell it to pay.
The current design for those like myself who want to be community minded is perfect for tax purposes. But despite that being the best model for myself, I see the benefit of allowing those who want all the chips for themselves to invest here, despite it not being my personal preference.
Ah ok, now I think I understand how you mean it, would be an interesting experiment. Everyone could set it the way they want.
The tax in your country is a strange thing, very strange. In my country you have to pay only when you exchanged in FIAT currency, because the profit is not known until the exchange.