4 ms·

Care to share these moral reasons?

chrisseaton 10y ago
Well you'd have to ask them, wouldn't you. What I am saying is that you should consider that maybe these people are not innumerate - they could realise that the policies they are voting for will harm them but they believe that it is the correct thing to do. Some people think that federal taxation in general is morally wrong and should be reduced. Whether you or I agree with that is irrelevant if what we're debating is have these people realised that it could help them but still think it's right to vote against it.
- pixelbash 10y ago
  Perhaps they are doing what they consider to be correct according to the information available to them. The question then becomes what information are they being given?
  - TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago
    What information are you being given. How are any of us supposed to vote in our best intetersts, individually or collectively, when all the bastard politicians are pathological liers.
    - smallnamespace 10y ago
      That's just a recipe for giving up. Read history, read the news, read foreign news sources (since they have less of an incentive to lie to you about your own country's domestic policies), use your brain.
    - pixelbash 10y ago
      Therein lies the rub. It's all very relative, all one can do is try. View through all the lenses at your disposal (there are many), apply critical thought and compare theory to fact. If you find your answers change from absolutes to 'it depends which perspective you start from' then you are probably on the right track.
phamilton 10y ago
I don't think it is morally right for a majority to enact legislation that targets a select group of people negatively. The extreme metaphor is two wolves and sheep voting on what to eat for dinner. Many people realize that such legislation would benefit them, but don't feel justified in depriving another individual of their property.
- ap22213 10y ago
  But, your theft is my surcharge. That is, me and many others don't view taxation as theft but as a charge for providing an ideal environment to amass wealth.
  - chrisseaton 10y ago
    But the point isn't your opinion on this argument, I'm just saying that it's possible that someone could genuinely believe in the argument at all. The original comment suggested nobody possibly could think like that, and suggested instead it must be innumeracy.
  - phamilton 10y ago
    Even with the surcharge view, there's the moral question of price discrimination. Because someone can afford to pay more for services and goods, should they be required to? Some say yes, some say no. As stated elsewhere in this thread, it's not about "the right answer". It's about how individuals often act according to their moral view of the world. Just because you don't share that view, doesn't make their conclusions automatically uninformed and incorrect.

Well you'd have to ask them, wouldn't you. What I am saying is that you should consider that maybe these people are not innumerate - they could realise that the policies they are voting for will harm them but they believe that it is the correct thing to do. Some people think that federal taxation in general is morally wrong and should be reduced. Whether you or I agree with that is irrelevant if what we're debating is have these people realised that it could help them but still think it's right to vote against it.

pixelbash 10y ago
Perhaps they are doing what they consider to be correct according to the information available to them. The question then becomes what information are they being given?
- TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago
  What information are you being given. How are any of us supposed to vote in our best intetersts, individually or collectively, when all the bastard politicians are pathological liers.
  - smallnamespace 10y ago
    That's just a recipe for giving up. Read history, read the news, read foreign news sources (since they have less of an incentive to lie to you about your own country's domestic policies), use your brain.
  - pixelbash 10y ago
    Therein lies the rub. It's all very relative, all one can do is try. View through all the lenses at your disposal (there are many), apply critical thought and compare theory to fact. If you find your answers change from absolutes to 'it depends which perspective you start from' then you are probably on the right track.

phamilton 10y ago

I don't think it is morally right for a majority to enact legislation that targets a select group of people negatively. The extreme metaphor is two wolves and sheep voting on what to eat for dinner. Many people realize that such legislation would benefit them, but don't feel justified in depriving another individual of their property.

ap22213 10y ago
But, your theft is my surcharge. That is, me and many others don't view taxation as theft but as a charge for providing an ideal environment to amass wealth.
- chrisseaton 10y ago
  But the point isn't your opinion on this argument, I'm just saying that it's possible that someone could genuinely believe in the argument at all. The original comment suggested nobody possibly could think like that, and suggested instead it must be innumeracy.
- phamilton 10y ago
  Even with the surcharge view, there's the moral question of price discrimination. Because someone can afford to pay more for services and goods, should they be required to? Some say yes, some say no. As stated elsewhere in this thread, it's not about "the right answer". It's about how individuals often act according to their moral view of the world. Just because you don't share that view, doesn't make their conclusions automatically uninformed and incorrect.