Moral duty to pay taxes - when?

Arnfinn Madsen · #1 07-05-2007, 09:59 AM

Let's say you earn $100k on some legal activity that can not be traced. In which regimes do you feel that you have a moral obligation to pay and in which not?

I.e. which of these, where do you draw the line?
-Democratic society
-Under Hitler/Stalin
-Under Franco/ greek military Junta
-Current Egypt
-The medieval church
-A very corrupt democracy
etc.

pvn · #2 07-05-2007, 10:27 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Let's say you earn $100k on some legal activity that can not be traced. In which regimes do you feel that you have a moral obligation to pay and in which not?

I.e. which of these, where do you draw the line?
-Democratic society
-Under Hitler/Stalin
-Under Franco/ greek military Junta
-Current Egypt
-The medieval church
-A very corrupt democracy
etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

None.

Arnfinn Madsen · #3 07-05-2007, 10:29 AM

[ QUOTE ]
None.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

[img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Nielsio · #4 07-05-2007, 11:44 AM

Maybe the OP can explain why there would be such a moral duty.

Borodog · #5 07-06-2007, 10:04 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Let's say you earn $100k on some legal activity that can not be traced. In which regimes do you feel that you have a moral obligation to pay and in which not?

I.e. which of these, where do you draw the line?
-Democratic society
-Under Hitler/Stalin
-Under Franco/ greek military Junta
-Current Egypt
-The medieval church
-A very corrupt democracy
etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

None.

[/ QUOTE ]

bkholdem · #6 07-05-2007, 10:27 AM

I never feel a moral duty to fork over money to some outside authority that is going to decide how best to spend my money. Any moral 'duty' I feel has nothing to do with some humans threatening me (I don't know about all those regimes and if any would have no threats)

bobman0330 · #7 07-05-2007, 02:46 PM

I'd say no obligation under Hitler, medieval society, or a corrupt democracy. In that case, most of the money would be going to fund pointless war and genocide, pointless war, or corruption, respectively, and none of those benefit or are intended to benefit me.

In the other cases, I would feel obliged to pay at least a portion of my tax bill.

lehighguy · #8 07-06-2007, 01:19 AM

No matter what your noble aims, wouldn't you always be better off donating the money to charity.

bkholdem · #9 07-06-2007, 06:42 AM

[ QUOTE ]
No matter what your noble aims, wouldn't you always be better off donating the money to charity.

[/ QUOTE ]

If your goal is to help the needy (and/or to feel good about yourself by helping the needy) then yes. If your goal is to feed a system where some humans exercise control over other humans then no.

Nielsio · #10 07-06-2007, 07:21 AM

[ QUOTE ]
No matter what your noble aims, wouldn't you always be better off donating the money to charity.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's always better if people can choose what to do with their money.

People can then make a decision on what they think is best. If they think it's charity, then charity it is.

So for example the foreign aid situation. If people think it just perpetuates the situation because it feeds corrupt governments? Then they stop giving money to that.