> The citizen, looking the health of their society, has to take a wider view and consider if the existing tax laws and enforcement is contributing to a better or worse society.
This is very important in deciding to pay taxes at all, and highly salient for people trying to impact tax legislation.
In terms of tax _burden_, though, it's quite odd to do anything but minimize taxation, and the extent of minimization cannot be extrapolated to social health or social costs.
The primary mechanism the government has to shape the economy is through taxation. It's not just transferring cash to the collective public coffers, there are specific reasons the government wants or doesn't want certain kinds of spending and certain kinds of economic relationships. You get a mortgage deduction because house ownership has perceived social benefits, for example. You get write offs for specific programs, or kinds of spending the gov wants to encourage. By ignoring the relevant tax-regime you are also ignoring the economic directives of your elected government.
At the same time: overpaying on your taxes is a highly inefficient way to do just about anything. Send post-tax cash to the DOD, NHS, charities, political parties, or to Lockheed-Martin directly, if you're so inclined. This will always yield more direct impact then indirect funding through government taxes.
Legal tax minimization is good for the economy and lets capital move 'intelligently' towards desired outcomes. It lets legislators shape the cradle-to-grave picture while maintaining representational control. Illegal tax minimization is criminal :)