3 ms·

Those examples (writing a will, giving flu shot) are an expense of the giver, and the giver alone. (In the flu shot example, assuming they're not stealing one

Those examples (writing a will, giving flu shot) are an expense of the giver, and the giver alone. (In the flu shot example, assuming they're not stealing one from their employer.) With "get out of jail free cards", the expense is borne by society: blue family members speeding without risk of punishment increases the danger to other people, and at no cost to the officer giving the perk. Equivalently, pretend the offender's fine is just paid out of some public coffer. They're taking money from the city. If, say, the police officer's union wanted to pay supporters' fines out of their own coffers, I could see an argument that it's not immoral. At least then they'd be incentivized not to hand out so many…

JoeAltmaier 9y ago
Not paying taxes on the income you didn't make is borne by society (as I mentioned). No, its all about the same deal. Ethically anyway.
- colanderman 9y ago
  Gifts under $14,000 aren't taxable.
  - JoeAltmaier 9y ago
    Barter is. You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours. Further, the cop isn't gaining financially at all.
    - colanderman 9y ago
      As I replied in another comment, where's the barter in your examples? I see gifts. If there is barter, yes, one must pay tax, or it's unethical. Where did I say the cop was gaining financially? Why does that even matter? Now you could say our whole system of taxation is unjust and thus skirting it is unethical. That's fine, but has nothing to do with get-out-of-jail-free cards, since, as you point out, the cop is not gaining financially. The examples you gave are ultimately poor analogies because not only are the laws potentially broken different (taxation vs. speeding), but the officer is explicitly in a position of enforcing the law, making that scenario a conflict-of-interest. A better analogy would be a government worker awarding a contract to a friend. Such an act is widely considered unethical, even if the friend charges the same and performs the same as another contract applicant. It's unethical, and a conflict of interest, because the worker is using their position of power for quid-pro-quo (a social benefit for the worker). Of course, none of the above paragraph is true for a private corporation; it is beholden only to itself and can choose whatever chum it wants for contract work. Likewise, I could see an ethical argument in favor of a cop who pays from their own pocket the tickets of family members. Just not one who flouts his duty as a government officer for quid-pro-quo gains.

JoeAltmaier 9y ago

Not paying taxes on the income you didn't make is borne by society (as I mentioned). No, its all about the same deal. Ethically anyway.

colanderman 9y ago
Gifts under $14,000 aren't taxable.
- JoeAltmaier 9y ago
  Barter is. You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours. Further, the cop isn't gaining financially at all.
  - colanderman 9y ago
    As I replied in another comment, where's the barter in your examples? I see gifts. If there is barter, yes, one must pay tax, or it's unethical. Where did I say the cop was gaining financially? Why does that even matter? Now you could say our whole system of taxation is unjust and thus skirting it is unethical. That's fine, but has nothing to do with get-out-of-jail-free cards, since, as you point out, the cop is not gaining financially. The examples you gave are ultimately poor analogies because not only are the laws potentially broken different (taxation vs. speeding), but the officer is explicitly in a position of enforcing the law, making that scenario a conflict-of-interest. A better analogy would be a government worker awarding a contract to a friend. Such an act is widely considered unethical, even if the friend charges the same and performs the same as another contract applicant. It's unethical, and a conflict of interest, because the worker is using their position of power for quid-pro-quo (a social benefit for the worker). Of course, none of the above paragraph is true for a private corporation; it is beholden only to itself and can choose whatever chum it wants for contract work. Likewise, I could see an ethical argument in favor of a cop who pays from their own pocket the tickets of family members. Just not one who flouts his duty as a government officer for quid-pro-quo gains.