4 ms·

I'm not participating in the conversation around the moral imperatives for corporations. I am curious about your statement: > Government shouldn’t be in the p

I'm not participating in the conversation around the moral imperatives for corporations. I am curious about your statement: > Government shouldn’t be in the position where their own tax base can manipulate them. I would like to hope by definition a democratic government is one where the tax base can manipulate the government. Going against that seems like suggesting we move to a model of "Taxation without representation". I'm bringing it up because I'm sure you didn't intend your statement in this way. It might be worth it to re-think/phrase it.

ben_w 8y ago
> I would like to hope by definition a democratic government is one where the tax base can manipulate the government. Going against that seems like suggesting we move to a model of "Taxation without representation". The tax base and the voters are not the same thing. Unemployed have a vote, corporations do not. Additionally, in the case of tax system manipulation, it is the richest who wield the greatest power. As a relatively boring private individual, no action I personally take to move my income to regions of low tax has any noticeable impact on a government — 100% of my tax is still less than most rounding errors. Large multinationals, on the other hand… Apple International is tax resident in the Republic of Ireland, and Apple (parent company not International) has an annual revenue of 70% of Ireland’s GDP. I can see how my language choice led to your comment. I’m worried this is one dollar one vote, not one person one vote.