3 ms·

This is such a garbage attitude. You'd really do anything, no matter how immoral as long as it's not illegal? I hope we never meet and you have zero influence o

by harry8 5y ago

This is such a garbage attitude. You'd really do anything, no matter how immoral as long as it's not illegal? I hope we never meet and you have zero influence on my life, the lives of my family, and indeed the human race. Taking an ethical position one way or another regardless of the law as currently written, interpreted and enforced is a really reasonable thing to do. Not taking an ethical view and outsourcing that to current law? You need to defend that. Think of all the obvious examples of utterly heinous behavior that were not illegal when they happened. Most of the very worst were not. Start with the bogeymen of evil. As for tax dodging. FFS if you've got more money than your grandchildren can spend and you still want to not pay a contribution to the society that enabled that and protects it from just being taken from you? That's what makes you happy? Because it's happiness you're getting. You're way past toy money at that point, you can be as vapid as to buy more Bugattis and fly everwhere first class either way. You want to avoid tax for charity? Charity is tax deductable so that's BS on roller skates too. And I /hate/ sounding like an angry socialist because I'm not even close to being the latter.

Moodles 5y ago
> And I /hate/ sounding like an angry socialist Well you definitely sound like one when your first sentence is "this is such a garbage attitude". And no, I never said I would do anything, no matter how immoral, to avoid taxes? But you can carry on if you want.
- harry8 5y ago
  Great so we're on the same page. "not actually illegal" doesn't count for much at all as a deflection of any moral responsibility. Maybe don't say it if you don't believe it? But yeah, it does make me angry and I have a fair bit of sympathy for socialists of which I am definitely not one when they get angry about this kind of thing. Rather more than for tax dodgers claiming "it's not actually illegal so no moral judgement can be made." But that's not you despite what you wrote as you've now clarified. > "Why on earth wouldn't you legally avoid tax if you could" You evidently have answers to this question yourself as indeed we all should. Once there, there is plenty of room for discussion and debate.
  - Moodles 5y ago
    I don't think we're on the same page. I'm just saying, personally, I would definitely choose myself and my family over the government and pay zero taxes legally if I could. Now, if the law was ridiculously immoral, like I could only avoid taxes legally by siphoning money to North Korea or something, maybe I would think twice about the moral component, but some tax loophole in a Roth? I don't give a shit. I'll choose my family, thanks. And I don't see how you have the moral high ground here either. Does the US government have better morals than me? Who'll spend the money better for humanity? I bet I would honestly. And I would go as far to say that the majority of people think the same way as me. Who the hell wants to pay more taxes? Now, I'm not saying we should all pay no tax. I'm saying it's a prisoner's dilemma: we're all better off individually if we don't pay taxes, but as a group we're all better off if everyone pays taxes. I don't see how this is controversial or triggering for you, and your response style sucks.
    - harry8 5y ago
      No property rights for your family, you wave them. No legal recourse - you don't get your day in court. No roads, no driving for you and no delivery involving driving. You believe that if your compatriots were uneducated your life would be better. All worth more than the tax saved to your family... It's basically impossible to refuse the benefit of the externalities - national defence, National parks, peace on the streets. So yeah, paying zero tax is straight up freeloading on those around you who do pay so they don't live in a failed state. There are a few of failed states around. Probably don't have to pay tax if you move to one. The Bahamas is not a failed state and arguably closer to what you're advocating. We /are/ on the same page because now you've moved from ethics free argument to one involving your version of ethics. Plenty to discuss there, that barely scratches the surface and any deeper is likely a waste of time. There is a huge difference between genuine libertarian belief an just being a "tax karen" with a pretence libertarian justification. The only thing they really want is not to pay. The latter have really messed up libertarianism and that's a pretty big loss. Including in our tax bills if we can't or choose not to avoid it all.
      - Moodles 5y ago

by harry8 5y ago

Moodles 5y ago

> And I /hate/ sounding like an angry socialist Well you definitely sound like one when your first sentence is "this is such a garbage attitude". And no, I never said I would do anything, no matter how immoral, to avoid taxes? But you can carry on if you want.

harry8 5y ago
Great so we're on the same page. "not actually illegal" doesn't count for much at all as a deflection of any moral responsibility. Maybe don't say it if you don't believe it? But yeah, it does make me angry and I have a fair bit of sympathy for socialists of which I am definitely not one when they get angry about this kind of thing. Rather more than for tax dodgers claiming "it's not actually illegal so no moral judgement can be made." But that's not you despite what you wrote as you've now clarified. > "Why on earth wouldn't you legally avoid tax if you could" You evidently have answers to this question yourself as indeed we all should. Once there, there is plenty of room for discussion and debate.
- Moodles 5y ago
  I don't think we're on the same page. I'm just saying, personally, I would definitely choose myself and my family over the government and pay zero taxes legally if I could. Now, if the law was ridiculously immoral, like I could only avoid taxes legally by siphoning money to North Korea or something, maybe I would think twice about the moral component, but some tax loophole in a Roth? I don't give a shit. I'll choose my family, thanks. And I don't see how you have the moral high ground here either. Does the US government have better morals than me? Who'll spend the money better for humanity? I bet I would honestly. And I would go as far to say that the majority of people think the same way as me. Who the hell wants to pay more taxes? Now, I'm not saying we should all pay no tax. I'm saying it's a prisoner's dilemma: we're all better off individually if we don't pay taxes, but as a group we're all better off if everyone pays taxes. I don't see how this is controversial or triggering for you, and your response style sucks.
  - harry8 5y ago
    No property rights for your family, you wave them. No legal recourse - you don't get your day in court. No roads, no driving for you and no delivery involving driving. You believe that if your compatriots were uneducated your life would be better. All worth more than the tax saved to your family... It's basically impossible to refuse the benefit of the externalities - national defence, National parks, peace on the streets. So yeah, paying zero tax is straight up freeloading on those around you who do pay so they don't live in a failed state. There are a few of failed states around. Probably don't have to pay tax if you move to one. The Bahamas is not a failed state and arguably closer to what you're advocating. We /are/ on the same page because now you've moved from ethics free argument to one involving your version of ethics. Plenty to discuss there, that barely scratches the surface and any deeper is likely a waste of time. There is a huge difference between genuine libertarian belief an just being a "tax karen" with a pretence libertarian justification. The only thing they really want is not to pay. The latter have really messed up libertarianism and that's a pretty big loss. Including in our tax bills if we can't or choose not to avoid it all.
    - Moodles 5y ago