You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Is this oppressive transparency? Norway (like Steemit) has all salaries available for public inspection
I would be more worried about my spendings being public.
I like privacy, but I think fighting corruption wthout transparency is impossible. The equilibrium is difficult to reach but I think salaries being public is a good idea. Not a detailed report, just the toal income, and maybe even with some error (50 000- 60 000 $ per year instead of the exact amount for example)
I am also concerned about cryptocurrencies, I do not want them to became the evolution of Swiss banks when Switzerland removes bank secrecy.
Openness and transparency is useful only if it benefits the security of the individual. Corruption isn't inherently right or wrong as it depends on the consequences of it.
My point is, privacy at times benefits security and reduces risks but at other times or possible in the same time it can introduce new risks. Depending on what you're more concerned about (jealous people robbing you or corruption) will determine what is better for your security.
A person who is making more money than most people or who is wealthy does not want the whole world to know because to be wealthy or high income is to be a target. The majority of people might favor transparency because they have less to lose than the wealthy minority.
Corruption is a robbery, it must be prosecuted by law no matter the moral circumstances.
Most wealthy people wear expensive clothes, use an expensive smartphone, live in expensive houses, and most of them are famous people. so there are already a target.
Those who do not want to make expensive expenditures in order to maintain privacy do not need so much money, they could donate a big amount to the government or charities and only declare the amount obtained for personal spending.