> There seems to be some philosophical disagreement here: what obligation is there beyond the letter of the law? Spoken like a true sociopath. The world doesn'

> There seems to be some philosophical disagreement here: what obligation is there beyond the letter of the law? Spoken like a true sociopath. The world doesn't exist purely for each and everyone to scheme their way through, the world is generally a much better place if everyone works to improve the world instead of their own standing in it. Here is where the disagreement comes from (very broadly speaking): Americans hold the utilitarian point of view that if everyone chases their personal goals the world will improve, while Europeans think the world will improve if everyone works towards common goals. In the latter worldview, the law isn't the only boundary to observe, it's merely the option of last resort. Here's where the utilitarian approach falls flat: it only works if everyone is of comparable power. Having one or two mega-corporations that have more power than entire countries is not going to produce a universally better society. > I'm sure it's satisfying in the short term to siphon off a fine here and a tax there from these companies I'm sure it's equally satisfying for American companies to siphon off European profits to overseas territories while giving nothing in return.