Why is it that people are more happy to pay a waiter or waitress an additional tip (on top of their salary and the cost of the meal) than to pay taxes to the government (who will in theory use that revenue for good)? It seems a little ironic… Waiters don’t need that tip, it’s more of a courtesy, a “thank you”. Governments on the other hand rely heavily on taxes, and in many cases (for example in Canada) the taxes are put to well use (don’t debate this– I’m from the third world).

After some thorough analysis, I’ve come to the wise conclusion that there are three reasons for this:

First. People identify with the receivers of the tips. They can see themselves in their positions and understand the importance of such. On the other hand, sometimes it is difficult to sympathise with the government and happily pay the costly taxes.

Second. Most people and mostly everywhere are skeptical about their government. Critics come easily and often unfounded. Therefore, one can see a tip as a just reward, while taxes are often questioned and often used ineffectively.

And third. There is a very strong popular culture that hates taxes. It seems like everyone wants all the benefits (cheap education, good public transportation, health care, social security programs, etc) but they never fail to groan when it comes to paying taxes.

Come on, humanity, why not change our view on taxes?!

PS: as long as taxing is fair, of course.

In an article on The New Yorker, titled “Out of the Office”, written by Kelefa Sanneh, some interesting arguments about progress are made. Sanneh talks about the book Shop Class as Soulcraft written by Matthew Crawford. In the book Crawford describes his experience quitting his prestigious job to open a shop that fixes motorcycles. Long story short, Crawford’s book is about how he’s so happy about his “small shop” and that everyone should do the same! He is an anti-big-corporation advocate.

The article discusses the notion of change, and how it is so engrained in American politics (Democrats and Republicans) with a very positive connotation. Change, progress, forward. .. And in theory, it seems that something is good when it advances. Going back is falling behind. After learning about chain supply and operations, I started thinking about the inevitability of big corporations. The “big guys” in an industry are usually the ones with cheaper prices and greater productivity. Both business and life are competitions. Imagine if you put hundred children in a new planet. Hierarchies would probably rise, some would be stronger, or better at different things. Groups would appear, and although there might be alliances and peace, it is hard to imagine that each kid had the exact same power as the others. The same happens in capitalist economies.

So, which one is better? Big corporations that offer cheaper, good products or local “happily-made” products?

Chatting about a research paper with a high school teacher, we drifted a bit and ended talking about the ethics of world size corporations such as Walmart. If Walmart were a country, it would be the 25th largest economy. Read more about it here. Now, this is worth our time to stop and analyze. A corporation grater than 157 other countries?! Let’s remember that by definition a government is supposed to “take care” in some form or another of its people (in theory, that is), while a corporation’s primary or sole purpose is not usually understood to be benefit-giving to the majority of the citizens.

Now, regarding Costa Rica, the entrance of Walmart would have major long lasting effects: starting with the urban immigration, local shops pushed to bankruptcy, and new hundreds of job positions. Jessica Barry writes in her blog about Walmart’s involvement in scandals and its tendency to get away with it. Nevertheless it’s worthwhile to stop one second, and see what’s going on here. Do we feel okay about the tradeoff of pushing to bankruptcy many small businesses for many new jobs?