I disagree with you on one point there, Morgie. The "as long as" bit. I know it sounds stupid, but I'm one of those often frowned-upon quacks that believe millionaires have as much right to their money as anyone else, and the same goes for large multinational corporations. Now, if you're going to say that either one of those are likely to look at you and laugh when you try to give it back, you're probably right, and if that can be verifiably the case then I would probably keep it out of convenience. Still, though, I'd have to say that out of a combination of my sense of right and wrong and just plain pride, I'd probably return it no matter what.

Except the government bit, of course. They steal from me constantly, thereby negating their right to ethical treatment ;)

I do doubt I get to check the status of the account it came from, so I can't verify if it did come from a wealthy individual, unless the name is Mr. B Gates or Mr. I. Asper. However I'll have to think about it more when I find out where the money did come from and I can't back up my words until I know either. I can't be put to the test just yet. I'm eager to find out what I do really!

Hehehehe... we shall see, we shall see.

weeeeeeee, I'd keep it. No questions asked, it's kinda like finding a 20 dollar bill in the street, someone lost it finding the person who did it is next to impossible and if you openly say "Hey i found $20 who's is it?" you just know the person who comes forth isn't going to be the person who did actually drop it... now on the other hand, if I saw someone drop it and could easily sneak by pick it up and walk away without them noticing, I wouldn't keep it... 'cuz there's just a lot more guilt when you KNOW where it came from ... unless it was a billionaire or the gov, then I'd still keep it regardless.

So it looks like our conscience isn't affect greatly if:
a) We don't know where it came from, or
b) It came from the Government
c) It came from a rich person who won't "need" it.
d) It came from a highly liquid, cost cutting Corporation.
Interesting...

Unless you're me, because my conscience operates independantly of all thoughts of "need". Theft is theft, scamming is scamming, etc., regardless of who's being scammed/stolen from/whatever. It's the principle that matters to me, not how much of an effect it has on the person in question.

So that you all know, I would also be just as quick to use physical force against a homeless person who stole my $20 bill when I accidentally dropped it as I would a billionaire who did the same.

What do y'all make of that? ;P

Plus, on top of all of that... were I a homeless person who dropped $20.00 and some guy picked it up, I would expect nothing less than the return of the money, and I would respond with (probably excessive, and probably deliberately so) violence if they disagreed with my views on this point. Were I a billionnaire and dropped the bill, the same would be true. I would severely assault someone for that twenty bucks, because of the principles involved. Still in the billionnaire's shoes, though, if it were offered to me freely, I would just tell the person to keep it.

And finally... the government issue still stands. There you have an example of a body that conveniently extracts money from me by threat of force/imprisonment (which, as we have seen, will be carried out), all the while blatantly ignoring its own constitution, about which we supposedly care so deeply. I would steal a million from them given the chance, and I wouldn't think twice if it weren't for the knowledge that it all came from other taxpayers just like me.

The Government is an interesting topic. You live under Canadian law: does this mean you *must* abide by it? There are Canadian borders you can cross to leave said Canadian Law if you do not wish to follow it. As you have not elected to leave, it means you abide by it (for argument's sake, let's pretend that there are NO coersions preventing you from leaving). The law states that the Government gets an amount of your earnings. Even if it did not come from other people, you would have to be stealing from the Government, by your own definitions. By staying in Canada, you agree to their rules yet you would be breaking them. How does that fit? (sure, there's no place better to go than Canada, but that's besides the point).

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough with the government thing. Really, due to the input from other taxpayers, I wouldn't ever actually steal from the government, or even evade income taxes, if given the chance, so long as I was still a drain on the system. You are correct in saying that I can leave any time I want (officially), and despite the fact that the date at which I'm able to would come a lot sooner were I not paying taxes, it is my responsibility to leave or abide by the laws in the country in which I live - or so you would think.

But wait... let's examine the rationale behind the direct relationship between a country and it's citizens for a second here, and for the time being, ignore the fact that federal income tax is actually *against* the law in Canada (although we are technically at war, at least to a greater degree than the Prime Minister or anyone else knew for a while...). All of the logic behind the argument that one should follow the rules or leave is beautiful and perfectly viable - as long as there is always somewhere to go. Hypothesize for a second that all the available living space on Earth or elsewhere is taken up by nations like our own, or worse (not far from the truth, eh?). All of a sudden, the situation is a little different. Regardless of why taxes are paid or to whom, the end result is that you are born into a system of taxation (and/or tyranny and horror, depending on where you live). You can't escape it by simply excercising your right to leave; there is no land left that is not governed by some undesirable body or another.

Under these circumstances, you have to go back and evaluate all the reasons WHY these bodies are in power. Trace it back through history, and I gaurantee that you'll eventually come up with some sort of contest, power struggle or whathaveyou. When it all boils down, the descendants of the guy with the bigger gun end up being the rulers. Is this right? Honest? Ethically sound? Useful? No. The government and laws of this country, like all others, are not in place and as they are because it is right for them to be so, but because of a system that is derived from strength in place of honesty; force in place of fair play. Some would argue that we live in a democracy. I disagree; the "democracy" in which we live is still largely bound to the system from whence it came. Just you try, as an elected government, to eliminate income tax. No, it is impossible. Our elected officials are powerless to make that change or really any other significant one to do with the basic functioning of the country. So it's back to the system again fucking us over; not specifically the government which administers it. Furthermore, all arguments of democratic righteousness can be knocked down by the simple fact that they started taking money off my paycheques before I had a choice in the matter - at 16 I was old enough to steal from, but not old enough to cast one single vote toward who got the money.

The end result? I follow the rules of this country not because I feel morally bound to do so as a result of living within its borders, but because it is, despite the frustration that accompanies it, the most convenient thing to do. *So long as I demanded no services in return*, I don't think it would be at all wrong of me to, could I find a way to do it, cease all payments of federal and provincial taxes, employment insurance, CPP, etc.

Saying that I live in Canada and am therefore bound to its rules holds up perfectly in a functional sense, but in an ethical sense it does not. I have yet to see one good reason why the control of the country should be in the hands that it's in, and until that reason presents itself, I will feel bound only to my own rules, regardless of where I live. Anything else I go along with, I do so because it is the simplest way.