Not if the fine is proportional to income. If the fine is supposed to sting a little, it should sting the same for everyone.
Then the law doesn't apply for people that are good at hiding their income from the government.
On the flip side, if the capitalism means doing monetary transactions for good and services regardless of your principles, then people with no moral values will be the most successful.
No, people who produce goods and services that people want will be most successful. It’s not a question of morals.
It’s not a question of morals.
That's what I pointed out as the problem.
How is that the problem? Those who most enrich others through provision of goods and/or services will be the most successful in a capitalist system. Those who most enrich others may be extremely moral people, may be amoral people, or may be anywhere in between. It’s not a question of morals because morals do not enter the equation, so your assertion that those “with no moral values will be most successful” has no basis in fact.
That conclusions rests on an unproven assumption that the consumer will purchase products from those with no moral values in preference to those with moral values. I think the plethora of boycotts disproves that, but even if it were true that means people want no moral values. Any attempt to force moral values upon them is totalitarian. It's totalitarian because there's no way other than to use the threat of violence to prevent individuals from freely negotiating an exchange of goods or services.
"No pdpbigbang, you're not allowed to let Bob clear your sewer drain. He's been determined to be immoral."
![Laws for the poor [1079x601 - 683KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/7w88of.png){kind=link}
(post is archived)