Kevin Drum posts
[These accusations of hypocrisy are] one of the most annoying tropes in existence, on both the left and the right. The point of laws is to provide a level playing field, and no one is a hypocrite for following existing law even if they think it should be changed. That goes for congressmen who accept earmarks even though they think earmarks should be banned, it goes for drivers who park for free on city streets even though they think parking meters should be installed, and it goes for rich people who pay taxes at the current rate even though they think that rate is too low.
No one is obligated to be a sucker. The whole point of taxation is that it’s a collective enterprise:
Let me second this and take it one further. I make every attempt to take loopholes where I find them. I actively encourage other people to do this. I do it not only vis-à-vis the government but every financial transaction I am engaged in or my associates are engaged in.
Never leave money on the table, I tell my family and friends.
Yet it is precisely because of my personal obsession with securing rent that I am a strident advocate of preventing rent seeking.
Why?
Because, I know for a fact that if you leave open a rent seeking opportunity at least one person will take it and that person will be me.
The reason I feel comfortable making these warnings is because I know that I am by no means the only person with the ability and inclination to do these things. I also know that these things are mutually destructive.
What I would like is a social contract in which we all agreed to do right by each other. Yet, in the absence of such a contract I fully intend to ruthlessly pursue my self-interest.
5 comments
Comments feed for this article
Thursday ~ April 21st, 2011 at 2:47 pm
Schisma Tism
“What I would like is a social contract in which we all agreed to do right by each other.”
In other words, if you do not take advantage of the rents, you’re permitting others to do wrong by you, even if it’s your fault for not taking advantage. They’re not to blame — you are.
I liken taking advantage of rents and fighting to reform or get rid of them as a white hat trying to hack the system in order to make it more secure. It’s the black hats we have to watch out for — but the white hats need to be listened to. Right now, the owners of the tax loopholes and expenditures aren’t paying attention to the white hats and are instead shopping in the goth district.
Thursday ~ April 21st, 2011 at 7:23 pm
Johnnie Linn
A quote by Samuel Johnson, from the Wikipedia page on hypocrisy:
“Nothing is more unjust, however common, than to charge with hypocrisy him that expresses zeal for those virtues which he neglects to practice; since he may be sincerely convinced of the advantages of conquering his passions, without having yet obtained the victory, as a man may be confident of the advantages of a voyage, or a journey, without having courage or industry to undertake it, and may honestly recommend to others, those attempts which he neglects himself.”
So, in your case, not having yet obtained the victory, is it because of lack of industry?
Thursday ~ April 21st, 2011 at 8:09 pm
GVChamp
You ruthlessly exploit rent but don’t want to ruthlessly exploit rent through the government.
I sense a contradiction.
Friday ~ April 22nd, 2011 at 2:03 am
David Shor
You can never design loop-hole free institutions, and so your behavior is welfare-reducing.
One of the big differences between our welfare state and Scandinavia is that people trust each other not to steal and exploit the system, and so they refrain from efficiency decreasing safeguards.
Friday ~ April 22nd, 2011 at 5:20 am
Niklas Blanchard
Alternatively, they trust people to game the system in the exact same way that everyone else does (or would) and they have priced this into their utility function. This is, of course, an argument from the “theory of second best”.
If everyone skims $100 off the top, then you’re the principled loser.