Majority wants both punishment for tax evaders and things to go fine for themselves
In most modern states, central institutions are funded by public taxation. This means, however, that tax evaders must also be punished. Once such a system has been established, it is also good for the community: it makes co-existence easier and it helps maintain common standards. However, such advantageous institutions do not come about by themselves. The community must first agree that such a common punishment authority makes sense and decide what powers it should be given. Climate protection is a case in point, demonstrating that this cannot always be achieved. But how can a community agree on sensible institutions and self-limitations?
The Max Planck researchers allowed participants in a modified public goods game to decide whether to pay taxes towards a policing institution with their starting capital. They were additionally able to pay money into a common pot. The total paid in was then tripled and paid out to all participants. If taxes had been paid beforehand, free riders who did not contribute to the group pot were punished by the police. In the absence of taxation, however, there would be no police and the group would run the risk that no-one would pay into the common pot.
Police punishment of both free riders and tax evaders quickly established cooperative behaviour in the experiment. If, however, tax evaders were not punished, the opposite happened and the participants avoided paying taxes. Without policing, there was no longer any incentive to pay into the group pot, so reducing the profits for the group members. Ultimately, each individual thus benefits if tax evaders are punished.
But can participants foresee this development? To find out, the scientists gave the participants a choice: they were now able to choose individually whether they joined a group in which the police also punish tax evaders. Alternatively, they could choose a group in which only those participants who did not pay into the common pot were penalised. Faced with this choice, the majority preferred a community without punishment for tax evaders – with the result that virtually no taxes were paid and, subsequently, that contributions to the group pot also fell.
In a second experimental scenario, the players were instead able to decide by democratic vote whether, for all subsequent rounds, the police should be authorised to punish tax evaders as well as free riders or only free riders. In this case, the players clearly voted for institutions in which tax evaders were also punished. “People are often prepared to impose rules on themselves, but only if they know that these rules apply to everyone,” summarises Christian Hilbe, the lead author of the study. A majority decision ensures that all participants are equally affected by the outcome of the vote. This makes it easier to introduce rules and institutions which, while demanding individual sacrifice, are best for the group.
The Latest on: Democracy
via Google News
The Latest on: Democracy
- This partisan impeachment inquiry is more than a waste of time. It imperils democracyon November 19, 2019 at 2:00 am
Let’s be honest here. These impeachment hearings are a total waste of time. Even as a show trial. Not because President Donald Trump did nothing wrong. Actually, these days that doesn’t really matter ...
- Trump Silent on Hong Kong as Senate Prepares Pro-Democracy Voteon November 18, 2019 at 9:01 pm
“I expect he would. I don’t know why he wouldn’t.” There has been remarkable bipartisan support for taking a tough stance against China’s crackdown on pro-democracy protests that continued to escalate ...
- Kafer: I criticized Trump on Salem’s 710 KNUS and lost my job. That’s bad for democracy.on November 18, 2019 at 8:40 pm
Fawning adoration and blinding animosity toward the president, like a poisonous gas, has seeped imperceptibly into journalism and that’s not good for democracy. Krista Kafer is a weekly Denver Post ...
- Election after election after ... Is it harming Israeli democracy?on November 18, 2019 at 2:31 pm
How long can Israel tolerate a caretaker government before trust in politics is eroded? New elections would carry the stalemate to a full year.
- Rubio: Bolivians stood up for democracy. The rest of the world must support them | Opinionon November 18, 2019 at 11:36 am
But the facts leave no ambiguity about the real story: Morales tried — and failed — to overturn a democratic electoral process, and the Bolivian people rightly are defending their democracy. After a ...
- In 2020, democracy will be decided at the marginson November 18, 2019 at 8:00 am
Launching a targeted strike to peel off Trump’s white, working-class support in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania — and winning the 2020 election — is how we will defeat Trump and save our ...
- Viewpoint: The Deep State Isn't the Real Threat to Democracyon November 18, 2019 at 7:07 am
And they’ve reminded us that the real threat to our democracy is not from an imagined deep state bent on undermining an elected president. Instead, it comes from a weak state of hollowed-out ...
- Belarus polls showed 'lack of respect' for democracy: monitorson November 18, 2019 at 4:10 am
Parliamentary polls in Belarus lacked respect for democracy and denied basic freedoms to voters and candidates, international vote observers said Monday, after the opposition failed to win a single ...
- Is it a coup or a return to democracy? Battle for Bolivia’s soul rageson November 17, 2019 at 2:00 am
Photograph: Marco Ugarte/AP On one side of Bolivia’s political chasm people and leaders are denouncing a “coup”. On the other, they are welcoming the “return of democracy”. The dispute over what is ...
- Belarus Leader Dismisses Democracy Even as Vote Takes Placeon November 17, 2019 at 12:43 am
“I’m not in the habit of worrying about this matter,” he said, adding that his administration “isn’t playing at some kind of democracy.” Lukashenko, a former collective farm boss, has ruled the ...
via Bing News