5 ms·

They are well within reason to lobby against policies they see as more destructive to the business community than the claimed net benefit. If you want an exampl

They are well within reason to lobby against policies they see as more destructive to the business community than the claimed net benefit. If you want an example of why you can't whimsically tax businesses for whatever you want, look at what happened to the yacht building industry in the US. Idiotic taxation destroyed it and cost thousands of jobs and millions in lost tax revenue. You can simultaneously be for fixing homelessness and be against destructive taxation of an industry. >they ask them to pay a slightly fairer share Let me stop you there. Your notion of calling this a "fairer share" is completely subjective and political. Why isn't a 99% tax of all profits fair, why not 0%? The phrase "paying their fair share" is nothing more than a baseless appeal to emotion, unless you're literally suggesting everyone pay the same amount for services they use. However, given that you are advocating raising taxes on entities already paying vastly more than the bottom 1/3rd, I strongly doubt you actually want equal taxation.

rchaud 8y ago
> If you want an example of why you can't whimsically tax businesses for whatever you want, When in the history of post-WW2 America has there been a situation where politicians have both the votes and the leverage to impose these kinds of frivolous taxes on corporations with the resources to fight them? The mere fact that "lobbying" in the US is not called bribery, like it is everywhere else, means that a local politician's spine is only as erect as the size of the cheque he gets for his/her 're-election efforts'.
ForrestN 8y ago
We're talking about politics, and I'm saying that Stripe should be ashamed of themselves. That's an inherently subjective and political claim. If you want to structure society and government according to empirics, well, good luck with that. An appeal to emotion doesn't have to be baseless. The broader tax environment in the United States is leading to growing income inequality. There are other countries with successful economies who tax the highest earners much more than we do. In my subjective opinion, fairness requires those who have been lucky enough to become rich to pay more taxes than they do in the U.S. at the moment. If it were up to me, companies who resist paying more taxes while their founders become overnight billionaires should be made to feel ashamed of doing so, hopefully driving up the cost of acting contemptibly toward their surrounding community by making it harder for them to hire. My subjective belief is that the problem of homelessness is worth spending more money on, and that it's really the least these companies can do to sit out of taxation debates. Having $400,000 to spend manipulating public opinion is having a thumb on the scale. The ideal of democracy is not that whoever has the most power should have the loudest voice.
- longerthoughts 8y ago
  >Having $400,000 to spend manipulating public opinion is having a thumb on the scale. The ideal of democracy is not that whoever has the most power should have the loudest voice. So are you also saying Benioff should stop supporting Prop C with his loud voice and big wallet?
- jdmichal 8y ago
  > The ideal of democracy is not that whoever has the most power should have the loudest voice. The ideal of democracy is that everyone has an equal vote, no matter how loud their voice. Anything else is basically reminiscent of Harrison Bergeron. [0] (And, in this case, the entity with a voice here does not even have a vote! Though its individual workers and owners and stakeholders do.) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron
  - ForrestN 8y ago
    The concept of “personhood” for corporations has really done a number in the collective consciousness.
- hueving 8y ago
  >We're talking about politics, and I'm saying that Stripe should be ashamed of themselves. That's an inherently subjective and political claim. Right, and it's just an opinion you back with no reasoning using historical context, economic analyses, etc. That's why it's all baseless crap. Convince us why this policy is a good idea. Don't just give a ra-ra to everyone who already thinks it is.

rchaud 8y ago

> If you want an example of why you can't whimsically tax businesses for whatever you want, When in the history of post-WW2 America has there been a situation where politicians have both the votes and the leverage to impose these kinds of frivolous taxes on corporations with the resources to fight them? The mere fact that "lobbying" in the US is not called bribery, like it is everywhere else, means that a local politician's spine is only as erect as the size of the cheque he gets for his/her 're-election efforts'.

ForrestN 8y ago

We're talking about politics, and I'm saying that Stripe should be ashamed of themselves. That's an inherently subjective and political claim. If you want to structure society and government according to empirics, well, good luck with that. An appeal to emotion doesn't have to be baseless. The broader tax environment in the United States is leading to growing income inequality. There are other countries with successful economies who tax the highest earners much more than we do. In my subjective opinion, fairness requires those who have been lucky enough to become rich to pay more taxes than they do in the U.S. at the moment. If it were up to me, companies who resist paying more taxes while their founders become overnight billionaires should be made to feel ashamed of doing so, hopefully driving up the cost of acting contemptibly toward their surrounding community by making it harder for them to hire. My subjective belief is that the problem of homelessness is worth spending more money on, and that it's really the least these companies can do to sit out of taxation debates. Having $400,000 to spend manipulating public opinion is having a thumb on the scale. The ideal of democracy is not that whoever has the most power should have the loudest voice.

longerthoughts 8y ago
>Having $400,000 to spend manipulating public opinion is having a thumb on the scale. The ideal of democracy is not that whoever has the most power should have the loudest voice. So are you also saying Benioff should stop supporting Prop C with his loud voice and big wallet?
jdmichal 8y ago
> The ideal of democracy is not that whoever has the most power should have the loudest voice. The ideal of democracy is that everyone has an equal vote, no matter how loud their voice. Anything else is basically reminiscent of Harrison Bergeron. [0] (And, in this case, the entity with a voice here does not even have a vote! Though its individual workers and owners and stakeholders do.) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron
- ForrestN 8y ago
  The concept of “personhood” for corporations has really done a number in the collective consciousness.
hueving 8y ago
>We're talking about politics, and I'm saying that Stripe should be ashamed of themselves. That's an inherently subjective and political claim. Right, and it's just an opinion you back with no reasoning using historical context, economic analyses, etc. That's why it's all baseless crap. Convince us why this policy is a good idea. Don't just give a ra-ra to everyone who already thinks it is.