From: Blanc Weber <blancw@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 93 11:08:23 PST
To: arthurc@crl.com
Subject: RE: Private and Public
Message-ID: <9311081907.AB19513@netmail.microsoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


But of COURSE the government has a right to know how much money you 
make -    It OWNS you;
why else would it protect you and educate you?

(Up Ahead -   be prepared . . . you have now crossed into the Twilight Zone).

Blanc
----------
From: Arthur Chandler
Subject: Private and Public
Date: Monday, November 08, 1993 9:31AM


  I'm sure that few folks want to unsheathe the pro- and con- spoofing
arguments again. But Patrick's last post got me thinking:
  Does the government have the right to know how much money I make, and
from what sources? The IRS says yes, absolutely. But Eric Hughes, in a
talk given at San Francisco State University, said, in response to a
question from an audience, that international digital banking will make
it very difficult for a national government to track monetary exchanges,
and thereby tax them. Furthermore, I deduced from the gleam in his eye
that Eric thought that this was a Good Thing (correct me if I
misconstrued you, Eric).
  Right now, there seems to be a kind of social contract between us and
the government: it protects us, provides free schools, etc etc, in
exchange for which we have to pony up a fair share of our earnings. It
follows, doesn't it, that the government has a right to enforce its laws
saying that everyone must pay that fair share of taxes? To enforce that
rule, it has a right, under certain conditions, to rummage around in our
records to see if we have hidden any income source from them.
  This may or may not be Big Brother. But it does seem to be the modus
operandi of every government that ever was.
  The point: concerns of privacy often come in conflict with the larger
obligations of public good. We can't say categorically that one must
always predominate.
  What do you think?