Can you imagine how unbelievably stupid and venal and untrustworthy you look when it's discovered that you deliberately lied about the timeline of your career? It's batshit that anyone would even consider it.

Whether you or I would do it or not, it's virtually guaranteed that someone within your business circle has. Do you really care that they did?

I'll jump in and say yes. I'd never trust someone who lies to get ahead, and I'd make sure they knew it. It's sad that some here seem to think honesty is too high a bar; it's really not.

So which is it?: are you lucky enough to live in a state without sales tax, or do you pay your state's use taxes promptly when you buy stuff online?

That's not even close to the same thing, whether an online retailer should charge taxes or not is a matter between the state and the retailer to settle and is currently up in the air; though I hear amazon will soon charge but will also introduce same day delivery. That's nothing like lying about my history to an employer to get a job or promotion.

The retailer does no owe sales tax to the state, you do as a citizen of that state.

You, not the retailer, are legally obligated to report your purchases and pay the tax.

I never said the retailer owed taxes to the state. And as I said, taxing online sales is a currently hot issue and relying on voluntary compliance of consumers isn't going to cut it and every state knows that. This is completely irrelevant anyway, I reject any assertion that failing to pay taxes due (often out of ignorance) on internet purchases is in any way comparable to deceiving your employer and co-workers by lying (on purpose) about your resume to gain social status.

You're rationalizing. It's tax evasion, a crime, regardless of ignorance. Many states have a simple online form for it. That it's voluntary doesn't make a difference; paying property taxes is also voluntary for people who own their homes. These facts are highly relevant: when you're a tax scofflaw it's best not to point fingers at those merely lying.

People who own their homes don't have mortgages. They pay their property taxes on their own initiative, the same as the honest people paying their use taxes.

You've stated your opinion about morality all right. You think it's okay to be a scofflaw (definition: "a person who flouts the law, esp. by failing to comply with a law that is difficult to enforce effectively"), even for tax evasion. Yet you'd look down your nose at someone lying to make ends meet. Tsk tsk!

Even lying to raise social status and get ahead is better than cheating on your taxes, according to the law.

Law and morals are vastly different things; sad that you confuse the two.

It's the opposite. Obama, the chief enforcer of laws in our country, said "Our law is by definition a codification of morality." Lying is legal when society deems the lies to be acceptable or not wrong enough. Tax evasion, however, is considered to be morally wrong by society, hence it's illegal.

Still grasping at straws I see, now it's argument from authority, any more fallacies you want to throw out. Laws are not morals, illegal does not mean immoral nor does legal mean moral and I don't care who you quote, you're wrong and they're wrong.

waterlesscloud is correct. It's a crime (tax evasion) for you to not pay your state's use taxes. Much more serious than lying to an employer; at least that's legal.

I probably wouldn't consider it. When it comes to how people react to injustice, shallowness, stupidity (such as age discrimination) there are exploders and exploiters. Exploiters figure out how to use peoples' superficiality, stupidity, and moral deficiency to their benefit. Exploders get angry and try to rally the good to the cause-- they're the whistleblowers.

I'm an exploder, not an exploiter. It's my nature. I'm way too honest and blunt to be an exploiter. (Fuck, here I am being honest about the fact that I don't think dishonestly is always bad and that for many minor forms of it, even though I could never pull them off myself, I'm ethically OK with it.)

But ask your local Googler whether I'd recommend whistleblowing as a career move.

In movies, people like exploders and whistleblowers, but in real life, people think of exploders as a pain in the ass (killing the messenger) while exploiters get ahead. I used to think that exploiters were all unethical, but I've come to realize that some people can be exploiters without being harmful or unethical.

I guess I don't see how lying about this can inherently not also cause you to have to lie about other things.

By which I mean, changing your resume from VP-at-48 to VP-at-43 either means that you're lying about how long you've been a VP (which is definitely now lying about experience/skill), or it means you're just moving all of your work experience up a sliding scale to appear younger; in which case you are now potentially lying about your work/experience/schooling as well, as tying that experience to a point in time is more than just human shallowness.

For example, let's say I was a web developer in the mid-nineties, but I decide to change that on my resume to appear more recent (to make myself seem younger). I'd argue that being a web developer in the mid-nineties is pretty far removed from being a web developer currently (so at what point does it become disingenuous...is sliding things ahead a few years ok? more than 5?)

This all seems too "The Secret of My Success" for my liking.

Cross your fingers and hope your new employer doesn't do the most basic of basic background checks.

I've never lied in a job search, so I don't think I have anything to worry about. First, I've never needed to do so and, second, I wouldn't perform well under that kind of cognitive load. For someone with my makeup, that style of career repair has little upside and adds a lot of risk. So it's extremely unwise.

As I said above, I'm an exploder, not an exploiter. I get angry at a rigged game and prefer to expose the worst players, rather than joining them. Call it pathological honesty. I also know that exploiters tend to do better at the corporate-ladder game than we exploders do, and I don't think all exploiters are unethical or bad people.

On average, exploders are better people than exploiters, but a decent person who's an exploiter has a much better shot at getting ahead.

If someone took credit for my accomplishment and it damaged by career, I'd be angry and want to get him back. I'd be incensed if he lied about something material (such as having a skill he lacked) and I hired him, and I'd probably fire him. If he lied about his age or family connections and got ahead on account of the charlatanry, well... it's not good, but I'd rather that he use victimless deceptions instead of the kind that actually hurt people.