4 ms·
Yes there is, especially if it results in the consumer paying more for a product. That's the government taking (additional) money away from you, and handing it
by module0000 8y ago
Yes there is, especially if it results in the consumer paying more for a product. That's the government taking (additional) money away from you, and handing it to a local company.
If that doesn't make sense, an example could help when you want to buy a hypothetical WidgetBox.
Amazon WidgetBox: $100.00
Local WidgetBox: $102.00
After the added tax on Amazon, now you have no choice but to pay $102.00 for something you could previously pay $100.00 for. In business speak, it's call "screwing you" - in the article it's dressed up as "helping local businesses (screw you)".
- mattmanser 8y agoApart from the local company's payroll makes up $50 of that cost, of which $20 goes to taxes, so society is still up $18. It's far more complicated than you make it seem.
- ionised 8y ago> Yes there is, especially if it results in the consumer paying more for a product. I don't see why ever-decreasing prices seems to be your metric for good here. I voluntarily pay more for certain things because it is a more ethical choice in those cases.