Adam Smith Institute - Latest Comments in Tax, privacy and the state

Re: Tax, privacy and the state

kenharvey — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:16:42 -0000

Those who call for transparency while hiding behind a pseudonym, demonstrate their fear of the transparency that they advocate. People should stand up and speak, but not with their face behind a veil.

Re: Tax, privacy and the state

Robert — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 20:42:33 -0000

The story is a perfect illustration why no one in his right mind would want his information in public hands. While these Norwegians may not have any personal criminality to hide, they have EVERYTHING to hide from criminals and other predatory hostis humani generis, whether they carry no badges (like the blackmailers), or whether they do carry government badges.

Re: Tax, privacy and the state

Nigel Sedgwick — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 03:37:40 -0000

It strikes me as rather 'strange' for an anonymous commenter to be supporting full disclosure by the whole population of what most of us would view as amongst the most strictly private of personal information.

Personally, I am a supporter of income tax as one of the fairer and more convenient of taxes. It taxes one when one has the money; it allows avoidance of taxing the basic means of living (through tax allowances) and so helps the very poorest; it supports taxing in accordance with economic footprint (well a flat-rate tax does), so being at least somewhat fair in charging for the returns from government provision.

However, should oosethatgoose get his/her way, I'll have to move from that stance: I value privacy (or rather my choice in what to keep private) more than that particular bit of sense in taxation.

Finally oosethatgoose is yet another to argue that criminals cannot be caught without punishment of the innocent. That's a call for more government because government is incompetent.

Best regards
Nigel Sedgwick

Re: Tax, privacy and the state

oosethatgoose — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 06:10:51 -0000

Sorry, I find your indignation in this matter highly artificial and worthy of the Daily Mail. There is a value to transparency that could be considered to outweigh the dangers of empty threats from blackmailers, which as the police confirm, never amount to anything. It's not ideal, but then neither are large-scale tax avoidance schemes that push up rates for the rest of us.