7 ms·

It means corruption is a basic human behavior. Its a self generating phenomena, and is „natural“. So there is no „illuminati“ to go after to solve this. Studie

by idclip 6y ago

It means corruption is a basic human behavior. Its a self generating phenomena, and is „natural“. So there is no „illuminati“ to go after to solve this. Studies try and see how problems can be solved - if there was a single organizing entity like a mafia boss, it would be simpler to tackle the issue but there isn't, so its Marder than first expected. As to tax evasion, id posit the question „so why are these people evading? Is it the law itself? Can they be otherwise somehow incentivized to invest in their Communities rather than evade? And how big is the contribution here? Is it worth pursuing?“

guerrilla 6y ago
> It means corruption is a basic human behavior. That is most certainly not what the study means. If you were going to extrapolate, you might be able to get away with corruption is basic rich people behavior, but even that is going way further than what the study is actually saying.
- nullsense 6y ago
  >That is most certainly not what the study means. If you were going to extrapolate, you might be able to get away with corruption is basic rich people behavior, but even that is going way further than what the study is actually saying. Corruption is incredibly widespread globally across all demographics. It tends to show up the least in WEIRD places, and be most obvious in poorer countries, but it's everywhere and every level of society.
  - karlp 6y ago
    > It tends to show up the least in WEIRD places What do you mean by that?
    - barumi 6y ago
      I'm not the OP, but to me the world "corruption" is a blanket term used to refer to the apparent or actual distortion of a system for personal gain. Thus corruption can be found on any system, no matter the scale, and regardless of the shape and form of the gain that may be attained. This definition implies that hypothetical cases such as a college professor using his right to park free of charge on campus to store his car collection, or a secretary using the company's printer to print out fliers, might surprise people who believe that corruption is the fruit of sinister morally and ethically empty sociopaths who are super wealthy and very powerful.
    - T-A 6y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology#WEIRD_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology#WEIRD_bias
milchek 6y ago
> Can they be otherwise somehow incentivized to invest in their Communities rather than evade? And how big is the contribution here? Is it worth pursuing I like this question. It makes me wonder what society would look like if we had micro community councils that operated this way, where residents “donated” parts of their wealth and those donations gave them some sort of stake, naming right, or voting power in community projects. I wonder if we’d get the same sort of donations we get by wealthy families to get hospital wards named after them etc. I suppose it requires a shift in what we value as humans, perhaps we could work toward a society where the amount you’ve given away gives you the most social credit or prestige, rather than how much you’ve amassed. Is it too naive and childish to think this sort of society is possible and could be an improvement over the current one?
- chii 6y ago
  > or voting power in community projects. but then they get called lobbyists when this happens.
  - trhway 6y ago
    the issue with lobbying is that too many and too large benefits is effectively sold for very cheap by the politicians selling stuff which aren't really theirs to start with. For example,a huge development should be permitted not in exchange for small political contribution. Instead the community should get something sizeable in return - new park, road, school, significant number of low income rentals, etc.
- Erwin 6y ago
  That society already exists in e.g. Nordic countries. If we look at Sweden, Finland etc, total tax revenues as percentage of GDP are 48-54%. In USA, they are 24.3%. So here's a smaller community where the majority is fine with high taxation in exchange for freely available health care, higher education etc. Family funds exist here (e.g. Novo Nordisk is 25% owned by a humanitarian fund, Mærsk) but are less important than US.
  - 6y ago
fit2rule 6y ago
They're evading because taxation is based on income. If it were based on expenditure, there'd be no avoiding.
- froh 6y ago
  I don't understand. Mind to elaborate? Eli5?
  - nobody9999 6y ago
    >I don't understand. Mind to elaborate? Eli5? Not OP, but I assume he/she means something like a consumption tax[0]. However, given that poorer people tend to spend more of their income than wealthier ones, unless such a tax is appropriately calibrated, it can be quite regressive. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumption_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumption_tax
    - fit2rule 6y ago
      In a nutshell: Poor people stay poor because they can't save. That is why income tax is repressive - it guarantees economic stagnation, since nobody wants to work for the man. Spending tax means that, no matter who you are, you will pay your taxes if you want to purchase something, whether its a commodity or product or service. The rich will still be able to be rich - in fact, there will be more rich people - but they won't be encouraged to spend any of it without sharing it in the form of taxes.
      - PedroBatista 6y ago
        That’s cute but the economy is based on spending. Governments want people with some money but not enough where they’ll start to think they can stay at home playing the stock market. If the majority did that, society would collapse. Also a version of that already exists in most countries, in Europe you pay around 18-25% of VAT in every purchase you make but income taxes tend to apply only if you make X amount of money which effectively means poor people don’t pay income tax.
eternalban 6y ago
Off shore safe havens exists because some sovereign authority has designated their domain as a "tax haven" and the usually very strict sovereigns of "big powers" are not sending their military to the said "off shore safe havens" to shut them down. Opaque segments of the global financial networks enable Black Ops. No need to drag in Weishaupt and his worshipful brethren here, correct? So let's just discuss the "secret services" of the "big powers". Are they using the "tax havens"? I think the answer must be "Surely you jest, old boy!"
- adamsea 6y ago
  I don't know who Weishaupt is but that's a good point; it's probably in the interest of most major powers to have opaque segments of the global economy.
frabbit 6y ago
More like "illuminati" emerge "naturally" from the "Free Market".

by idclip 6y ago

guerrilla 6y ago

> It means corruption is a basic human behavior. That is most certainly not what the study means. If you were going to extrapolate, you might be able to get away with corruption is basic rich people behavior, but even that is going way further than what the study is actually saying.

nullsense 6y ago
>That is most certainly not what the study means. If you were going to extrapolate, you might be able to get away with corruption is basic rich people behavior, but even that is going way further than what the study is actually saying. Corruption is incredibly widespread globally across all demographics. It tends to show up the least in WEIRD places, and be most obvious in poorer countries, but it's everywhere and every level of society.
- karlp 6y ago
  > It tends to show up the least in WEIRD places What do you mean by that?
  - barumi 6y ago
    I'm not the OP, but to me the world "corruption" is a blanket term used to refer to the apparent or actual distortion of a system for personal gain. Thus corruption can be found on any system, no matter the scale, and regardless of the shape and form of the gain that may be attained. This definition implies that hypothetical cases such as a college professor using his right to park free of charge on campus to store his car collection, or a secretary using the company's printer to print out fliers, might surprise people who believe that corruption is the fruit of sinister morally and ethically empty sociopaths who are super wealthy and very powerful.
  - T-A 6y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology#WEIRD_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology#WEIRD_bias

milchek 6y ago

> Can they be otherwise somehow incentivized to invest in their Communities rather than evade? And how big is the contribution here? Is it worth pursuing I like this question. It makes me wonder what society would look like if we had micro community councils that operated this way, where residents “donated” parts of their wealth and those donations gave them some sort of stake, naming right, or voting power in community projects. I wonder if we’d get the same sort of donations we get by wealthy families to get hospital wards named after them etc. I suppose it requires a shift in what we value as humans, perhaps we could work toward a society where the amount you’ve given away gives you the most social credit or prestige, rather than how much you’ve amassed. Is it too naive and childish to think this sort of society is possible and could be an improvement over the current one?

chii 6y ago
> or voting power in community projects. but then they get called lobbyists when this happens.
- trhway 6y ago
  the issue with lobbying is that too many and too large benefits is effectively sold for very cheap by the politicians selling stuff which aren't really theirs to start with. For example,a huge development should be permitted not in exchange for small political contribution. Instead the community should get something sizeable in return - new park, road, school, significant number of low income rentals, etc.
Erwin 6y ago
That society already exists in e.g. Nordic countries. If we look at Sweden, Finland etc, total tax revenues as percentage of GDP are 48-54%. In USA, they are 24.3%. So here's a smaller community where the majority is fine with high taxation in exchange for freely available health care, higher education etc. Family funds exist here (e.g. Novo Nordisk is 25% owned by a humanitarian fund, Mærsk) but are less important than US.
- 6y ago

fit2rule 6y ago

They're evading because taxation is based on income. If it were based on expenditure, there'd be no avoiding.

froh 6y ago
I don't understand. Mind to elaborate? Eli5?
- nobody9999 6y ago
  >I don't understand. Mind to elaborate? Eli5? Not OP, but I assume he/she means something like a consumption tax[0]. However, given that poorer people tend to spend more of their income than wealthier ones, unless such a tax is appropriately calibrated, it can be quite regressive. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumption_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumption_tax
  - fit2rule 6y ago
    In a nutshell: Poor people stay poor because they can't save. That is why income tax is repressive - it guarantees economic stagnation, since nobody wants to work for the man. Spending tax means that, no matter who you are, you will pay your taxes if you want to purchase something, whether its a commodity or product or service. The rich will still be able to be rich - in fact, there will be more rich people - but they won't be encouraged to spend any of it without sharing it in the form of taxes.
    - PedroBatista 6y ago
      That’s cute but the economy is based on spending. Governments want people with some money but not enough where they’ll start to think they can stay at home playing the stock market. If the majority did that, society would collapse. Also a version of that already exists in most countries, in Europe you pay around 18-25% of VAT in every purchase you make but income taxes tend to apply only if you make X amount of money which effectively means poor people don’t pay income tax.

eternalban 6y ago

Off shore safe havens exists because some sovereign authority has designated their domain as a "tax haven" and the usually very strict sovereigns of "big powers" are not sending their military to the said "off shore safe havens" to shut them down. Opaque segments of the global financial networks enable Black Ops. No need to drag in Weishaupt and his worshipful brethren here, correct? So let's just discuss the "secret services" of the "big powers". Are they using the "tax havens"? I think the answer must be "Surely you jest, old boy!"

adamsea 6y ago
I don't know who Weishaupt is but that's a good point; it's probably in the interest of most major powers to have opaque segments of the global economy.

frabbit 6y ago

More like "illuminati" emerge "naturally" from the "Free Market".