Minor point: I think consequentialism vs non-consequentialism is one relevant distinction, but that distinctions between consequentialist views which value different things (not just utility) are also relevant. E.g., I imagine a person could be a consequentialist who primarily valued negative liberty, which might lead to being very concerned about taxation.
Reasons this is a minor point:
Just valuing ālibertyā might leave this initiative looking positive, as global health and development work probably increases positive liberty substantially.
Even a focus on negative liberty might still leave this initiative looking positive, if it turns out that increasing taxation in Zurich to pay for more global health and development work causes a net increase in negative liberty. E.g. by helping lead to more democratisation. (Iām not saying that this is the case; just that it seems plausible.)
I havenāt actually heard anyone endorse a consequentialist view which emphasises negative liberty. Though itās possible that thatās a good way to interpret some libertariansā views.
(Also, nice work on this ballot initiative, and thanks for the write-up!)
Minor point: I think consequentialism vs non-consequentialism is one relevant distinction, but that distinctions between consequentialist views which value different things (not just utility) are also relevant. E.g., I imagine a person could be a consequentialist who primarily valued negative liberty, which might lead to being very concerned about taxation.
Reasons this is a minor point:
Just valuing ālibertyā might leave this initiative looking positive, as global health and development work probably increases positive liberty substantially.
Even a focus on negative liberty might still leave this initiative looking positive, if it turns out that increasing taxation in Zurich to pay for more global health and development work causes a net increase in negative liberty. E.g. by helping lead to more democratisation. (Iām not saying that this is the case; just that it seems plausible.)
I havenāt actually heard anyone endorse a consequentialist view which emphasises negative liberty. Though itās possible that thatās a good way to interpret some libertariansā views.
(Also, nice work on this ballot initiative, and thanks for the write-up!)
Nice addition and caveats, thanks! :)