> Yes that why we have CEO's and executives swimming in money. That's totally orthogonal though. Competitive businesses can absolutely have highly paid executi

> Yes that why we have CEO's and executives swimming in money. That's totally orthogonal though. Competitive businesses can absolutely have highly paid executives. All you have to do is run the arithmetic of how much you can reduce the unit price of a mass-produced good/service by dividing all of the highly paid executives' salaries/compensation. The answer is not very much. Consider that Uber is not a profitable business, at the moment, and yet their CEO is compensated $50M. It doesn't take a genius to determine that merely distributing his high salary across the millions of drivers (or software engineers) or even trip riders does close to nothing for the unit economics of the business. > Its the tax dodging monolithic industries that are the problem. And their margins are able to absorb the cost multiple times over. But the tax isn't targeted at "tax dodging monolithic industries", it's universally applied. Not every "digital" company is FANG, there are hundreds of thousands of small SaaS businesses that would be affected too. The distortionary effects are almost always unintended. There is an entire sub-field in economics dedicated to researching "tax incidence" -> https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,33&qsp=1&q=corporate+tax+incidence+%22empirical+estimates%22&qst=ir https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,33&qsp=1&q...