4 ms·

So much of the tax avoidance tactics ends up as more investment and propels our economy forward. Amazon is a prime example. The government taxes profits. Amazon

So much of the tax avoidance tactics ends up as more investment and propels our economy forward. Amazon is a prime example. The government taxes profits. Amazon instead of making a profit, reinvests the money into its business. Even when corporations do stock buy backs, it's not like most of the money goes to the investors to spend frivolously. Instead most of it just gets reinvested in different businesses that have a better plan for the money than the company that did the stock buyback. Any way you slice it, Warren's plans just reduces reinvestment and puts the brakes on economic growth. You can't tax your way to prosperity unless the taxes are used strictly for things that are an investment in the economic future of the country such as education and infrastructure. Taking the money from those investing it and blowing it on entitlements is a terrible idea. At the end of the day, all this reinvestment creates jobs and allows individuals to provide for themselves instead of being dependent on sucking at the teat of the state.

moosey 8y ago
There are things that Amazon needs done to continue to run it's business effectively. Roads need repaired, crime needs to be kept down to acceptable rates, trash needs to be removed, they need to be defended from foreign nations, etc. The need of the corporations of our nation means that everyone, including these companies that don't build their own roads and militaries are on "the government teat". The idea that money is better in private hands than in the collective hands of government is a story that is oft repeated, but is far from proven. Arguably, studies I've seen of late show loss of efficiency and increased cost when privatized. This is a requirement for profit anyways. Further, money spent by government has had massive effect on economic growth. Hoover dam made the much of the West livable, nasa still had massive scientific output, and welfare programs are incredibly effective.
- aeternus 8y ago
  I'd be interested to know which studies? While I agree that Amazon should pay their fair share, I find it hard to believe that there is a general loss of efficiency when privatized. Companies have strong incentives to reduce costs, whereas government projects often have negative incentives to reduce costs. (Cost-plus contracting and use-it-or-lose-it budgets). NASA is a great example, that organization made some amazing breakthroughs early on, but has arguably stagnated. It is now being surpassed by private companies due to ballooning bureaucracy and cost-prohibitive mission proposals. Something that many thought impossible. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/space-exploration-sticker-shock/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/space-exploration...
  - maxxxxx 8y ago
    I'd agree that NASA is stagnating but without them there would probably be no private companies building rockets right now. They have done a lot of trial and error figuring out how rockets should work and now private companies are commoditizing this knowledge NASA has accumulated. We would know nothing about Mars either without NASA and Musk could not even dream of going there. NASA should go back to working on big leaps instead of being forced into things like the SLS by Congress. But private companies would go nowhere without the public investment through NASA.
- malandrew 8y ago
  Amazon pays for road repair. That happens through fuel taxes. The main problem with taxes used for roads is that they are grossly distorted. We should be paying for roads on the basis of vehicle miles traveled multiplied by gross vehicle weight per axle. That would force those responsible for the most wear and tear to roads to pay for the maintenance. This may increase the cost of goods and services to cover those costs, but at least then those goods and services will be accurately prices based on the input costs and that will determine if they should be produced in the first place and if so, in what quantities. If trash needs to be moved, charge for that service. That's what most businesses do. It's part of the costs of doing business and ends up impacting the price of the goods and services produced. For crime and military, even those are being paid for, directly and indirectly, by the business. By hiring people or making purchases, they are paying sales and payroll taxes and the people they employ are paying income taxes. The amount of taxes paid is proportional to the economic activity they produce. If they reinvest more, they pay taxes on that additional activity. The idea that some companies pay zero taxes because of zero profits is a blatant falsehood. Their activities still result in taxes being paid, just not on taxes on profit.
aeternus 8y ago
Sure, we should be encouraging reinvestment but how do you resolve the unfairness of companies that choose to reinvest themselves vs. pay out a dividend and allow investors to re-invest? Amazon benefits from many government-funded programs: educated workforce, road & rail infrastructure, national defense, judicial contract-enforcement, etc. Is it fair that a company that reinvests gets all that for free while a company that makes a profit pays substantially?
- SamReidHughes 8y ago
  This is true for any form of taxation, such as income/payroll taxes when paying for daycare versus watching your kids yourself.
- malandrew 8y ago
  How do you resolve that? You let the market decide. By buying Amazon, you’ve decided that Amazon knows how to reinvest that money better than you. If that were not the case, you can sell Amazon shares and buy a company that gives you dividends that you can reinvest as you see fit.

moosey 8y ago

There are things that Amazon needs done to continue to run it's business effectively. Roads need repaired, crime needs to be kept down to acceptable rates, trash needs to be removed, they need to be defended from foreign nations, etc. The need of the corporations of our nation means that everyone, including these companies that don't build their own roads and militaries are on "the government teat". The idea that money is better in private hands than in the collective hands of government is a story that is oft repeated, but is far from proven. Arguably, studies I've seen of late show loss of efficiency and increased cost when privatized. This is a requirement for profit anyways. Further, money spent by government has had massive effect on economic growth. Hoover dam made the much of the West livable, nasa still had massive scientific output, and welfare programs are incredibly effective.

aeternus 8y ago
I'd be interested to know which studies? While I agree that Amazon should pay their fair share, I find it hard to believe that there is a general loss of efficiency when privatized. Companies have strong incentives to reduce costs, whereas government projects often have negative incentives to reduce costs. (Cost-plus contracting and use-it-or-lose-it budgets). NASA is a great example, that organization made some amazing breakthroughs early on, but has arguably stagnated. It is now being surpassed by private companies due to ballooning bureaucracy and cost-prohibitive mission proposals. Something that many thought impossible. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/space-exploration-sticker-shock/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/space-exploration...
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  I'd agree that NASA is stagnating but without them there would probably be no private companies building rockets right now. They have done a lot of trial and error figuring out how rockets should work and now private companies are commoditizing this knowledge NASA has accumulated. We would know nothing about Mars either without NASA and Musk could not even dream of going there. NASA should go back to working on big leaps instead of being forced into things like the SLS by Congress. But private companies would go nowhere without the public investment through NASA.
malandrew 8y ago
Amazon pays for road repair. That happens through fuel taxes. The main problem with taxes used for roads is that they are grossly distorted. We should be paying for roads on the basis of vehicle miles traveled multiplied by gross vehicle weight per axle. That would force those responsible for the most wear and tear to roads to pay for the maintenance. This may increase the cost of goods and services to cover those costs, but at least then those goods and services will be accurately prices based on the input costs and that will determine if they should be produced in the first place and if so, in what quantities. If trash needs to be moved, charge for that service. That's what most businesses do. It's part of the costs of doing business and ends up impacting the price of the goods and services produced. For crime and military, even those are being paid for, directly and indirectly, by the business. By hiring people or making purchases, they are paying sales and payroll taxes and the people they employ are paying income taxes. The amount of taxes paid is proportional to the economic activity they produce. If they reinvest more, they pay taxes on that additional activity. The idea that some companies pay zero taxes because of zero profits is a blatant falsehood. Their activities still result in taxes being paid, just not on taxes on profit.

aeternus 8y ago

Sure, we should be encouraging reinvestment but how do you resolve the unfairness of companies that choose to reinvest themselves vs. pay out a dividend and allow investors to re-invest? Amazon benefits from many government-funded programs: educated workforce, road & rail infrastructure, national defense, judicial contract-enforcement, etc. Is it fair that a company that reinvests gets all that for free while a company that makes a profit pays substantially?

SamReidHughes 8y ago
This is true for any form of taxation, such as income/payroll taxes when paying for daycare versus watching your kids yourself.
malandrew 8y ago
How do you resolve that? You let the market decide. By buying Amazon, you’ve decided that Amazon knows how to reinvest that money better than you. If that were not the case, you can sell Amazon shares and buy a company that gives you dividends that you can reinvest as you see fit.