3 ms·
> The traditional moral reason for taxing profit is that it's excess money for which the company couldn't find a use; they've already paid the staff, invested i
by whatok 11y ago
> The traditional moral reason for taxing profit is that it's excess money for which the company couldn't find a use; they've already paid the staff, invested in R&D and maintained the corporate jet fleet and they still have money left over. The Government can quite easily find a use for that excess cash in providing infrastructure which the company needs in order to operate.
This is complete absurdity. There should be no "moral" reason behind taxes; only logical. Taxes on profit are punitive against small businesses and encourage tax optimization strategies that are not remotely related to any sort of sound business. Assuming any government is going to better spend money than private enterprise is one of the funniest things I've read today.
- vibrio 11y ago"Assuming any government is going to better spend money than private enterprise is one of the funniest things I've read today." As someone that works in the same industry as Pfizer (and Valeant), yes it is true that sometimes the government is going to spend money better than private enterprise. The Cost and success rate of R&D in drug devleopment is not sustainable without the significant funding the US government (and to some extent other governments) contributes to basic science. The Valeant CEO (now Ex) has used the phrase "value destroying R&D" and Pfizer is Pfamous in the industry for R&D Pfailures. Both have been serial acquirers where they find much of their post-consolidation synergies in R&D, leading to deep cuts (often total cuts in Valeant's case). While they are acting economically rational way, the long-term consequences are that they are subsidized by the government.