‘Loophole’ is such great branding. Loopholes don’t exist - there are only ‘laws.’ Flawed laws are rebranded as loopholes. Similar to pharma’s invention of ‘side effects.’ There‘s no such thing as a side effect - there are only effects. Bad effects are rebranded as side effects.
-
I think I probably misinterpreted your original tweet as implying that you thought there is no difference. Glad to hear that's not the case, and sorry for the misinterpretation.
Granted that there often is a difference between what's moral and what's legal, it seems quite reasonable that many people's morality suggests companies should pay more than the legal minimum.
-
-
I hear that. What I'm wondering is that if people are going to judge companies by a moral standard for taxes (above and beyond legal minimum), how would they go about designing a framework for determining what's moral and what isn't?
-
Great question! But I've got to disappear to an early dinner. I guess my intuition is: individual ethics is fantastically difficult and complicated; it seems likely the same for a type of collective ethics applicable to companies. I'd happily read a good book on it...
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
The model may not be particularly sophisticated. A sense "companies don't pay enough, they should all pay at least 10% of revenue" would seem a believable moral position (note: I'm certainly not arguing for it!) Easy to find more elaborate (& more sensible) positions, IMO.
-
Very unrelated. But I do wonder if there was norm of more groups like Mormons that had tithing norm, what would be most interesting versions of that
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.