3 ms·

I agree that a state (or country, etc.) will nearly always have a certain amount of amorality (or immorality, for that matter). However most legislatures have a

I agree that a state (or country, etc.) will nearly always have a certain amount of amorality (or immorality, for that matter). However most legislatures have at least some morality as well. Taxes aren't always used to incentivize/disincentivize, sometimes they are gathered for public works or services, such as roadways, healthcare*, and unemployement benefits. I know that an individual may not always view those things as something the government should be taking a hand in, but I would like to think that, even if someone doesn't agree with the action, they can at least agree with the intention. *the current state of the US healthcare system notwithstanding.

vmception 6y ago
> I would like to think that, even if someone doesn't agree with the action, they can at least agree with the intention. right, and I find that unrelated to being obligated to pay it. its more like "way to go, guys!" buys gas across the county line "that's a great cause!" buys property in another state "yes, build that park Leslie Knope!" moves if I didn't do any of those things then I would pay it. if I wanted 1% - 50% more money to do a different thing and there was a legally compliant way to do so (enabled by the same authorities, mind you), I would consider it