What if their life circumstances didn’t allow it? We don’t know who they were supporting someone in their family or whether they had a visa status that prevented easily switching jobs etc.

We cannot assume that the negotiating parties - employer and employee - are operating at an equal footing. Most often it’s not. Therefore casting judgement like this is very misleading imo.

But my original point was also that Google is such a large company that it seems weird to blanket rule everyone who worked there as being guilty because some exec approved a deal. My question was, what about extending that to the economy as a whole. Sure it’s illegal to fail to pay taxes but my question was whether you think that’s immoral to participate in the economy at all, because it’s very much like this person’s participation in google.

I think we’d both agree on what the world should look like, but I also think we have to make practical choices in the world we live in. I don’t mean it as a defense of doing some horrible thing, of course, I hope that’s clear. But if such a large employer were out of bounds for moralistic reasons then very likely you’re looking at ruling out a bunch of other companies too and it’s too much of a disadvantage to operate in for an average person looking for a job.

Sorry for the rant / long post.. but I hope I got my point across!

The decisions you were referring to weren’t taking place in his department. He was in android security apparently. If we assume culpability with such a tenuous link then would you also say that paying taxes to a government engaged in such behaviour is morally unjustified per your morals?