In the West, practiced corruption is usually portrayed as a pertinent part of life in the developing world. In these so-called developing states, corruption is often deliberate. However, it does exist in the West in more covert forms. In an interview by Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez of Democracy Now, Chuck Collins of the Institute for Policy Studies was being asked to elaborate on unequal monetary situation of the United States. The questions asked included the senior executive bonuses versus taxes paid, tax dodging by corporations, costs of lobbying, offshore deposits/profits, and the changes to worker pay ratios over the last two to three decades.
The Q & A session continually revolved around how these corporations maneuvered around the laws. The participants here fail to realized that democratic ideals (a fair society where free will is the prime maxim) and capitalism (satisfaction via capital also based on free will) are juxtaposed but are never conjoined completely. If they advocated fairness, the need for competition would dwindle. The argument here is that even if ethical judgments of fairness and obedience to the laws set by the republic (such as the payment of taxes) are good in themselves, the individual(s) accused of corruption often sees their actions as justified for their own ends and the ends of others. These are seen as good by the corporations since it provides revenue and circulation of capital in the economy. This perception is seen as the accused as creating economic growth. However, from the third-person perspective, this is seen as corruption since satisfaction is not obtained by the individual(s) who is not benefiting from it.
To commence, free will is known to be the determining variable for both democracy and capitalism. Choices come from the free will for both functions. Furthermore, capitalism and democracy are both based on competition. The competitors from both systems are rational actors themselves who use the cost and benefit analysis to maximize utility. Now, regarding the dialogue, we start with tax dodging (evasion). Mr. Collins explains how the corporations try to avoid paying taxes by discreet means at their disposal. The problem with the dialogue is that the three participants compare the numbers of what was being paid in taxes and the profits/ bonuses accumulated. In criticizing them for being strictly quantitative about those who gain and those who lose, they do not consider the utility of the accused. One must consider if the situations or statuses of the participants in this dialogue were reversed, there will be little doubt that they would be doing the same as the accused.
Being a rational actor, the corporations do lobby to have these taxes deferred or reduced. If the lobbying action on a legislator is a success and a fiscal law is changed, the corporation obtains some satisfaction. Another point on the tax evasion question is that the government itself gets these tax revenues after necessary...