3 ms·

yes, and the focus on tech is a red herring distraction du jour. every company over $100MM should be scrutinized for breakup into smaller entities. m&a should b

yes, and the focus on tech is a red herring distraction du jour. every company over $100MM should be scrutinized for breakup into smaller entities. m&a should be default deny, with extraordinary evidence required for approval, with penalties that pierce the corporate veil for not meeting stated fair market objectives. that would actually encourage competition and functional markets without harming substantive efficiency/productivity gains from economies of scale, which, despite the popular conception, tend to be sublinear rather than superlinear. that's because coordination problems scale superlinearly with size (a la mythical man month), which in turn is why there is a optimum firm size both for the firms themselves as well as for the markets they compete in. markets (independent actors loosely coordinating via price signals) actually specifically arose to solve these very coordination problems.

zozbot234 5y ago
> yes, and the focus on tech is a red herring distraction du jour. every company over $100MM should be scrutinized for breakup into smaller entities. Or we could just levy punitive corporate taxes on large companies over $100MM, and let market participants figure out the most efficient breakup arrangement. Come to think of it, this doesn't look all that different from what the Biden administration seems to be planning re: global corporate taxation.
- clairity 5y ago
  i'm absolutely in favor of progressive tax functions (minus the numerous loopholes, e.g., tax shields) for corporations. in fact, there's no reason to have differing corporate and individual tax functions (smoothly varying, as opposed to discontinuous, stepped rates), especially when corporations have gained favored personhood status, and are treated better and more deferentially relative to actual people. note that the biden global tax is a tax floor, and discontinuities just beg to be gamed. moreover there's no reason to preclude one for the other. let's do both, and more, to make markets competitive and work for the common welfare, rather than decidedly favoring consolidation and capital-holders.

zozbot234 5y ago

> yes, and the focus on tech is a red herring distraction du jour. every company over $100MM should be scrutinized for breakup into smaller entities. Or we could just levy punitive corporate taxes on large companies over $100MM, and let market participants figure out the most efficient breakup arrangement. Come to think of it, this doesn't look all that different from what the Biden administration seems to be planning re: global corporate taxation.

clairity 5y ago
i'm absolutely in favor of progressive tax functions (minus the numerous loopholes, e.g., tax shields) for corporations. in fact, there's no reason to have differing corporate and individual tax functions (smoothly varying, as opposed to discontinuous, stepped rates), especially when corporations have gained favored personhood status, and are treated better and more deferentially relative to actual people. note that the biden global tax is a tax floor, and discontinuities just beg to be gamed. moreover there's no reason to preclude one for the other. let's do both, and more, to make markets competitive and work for the common welfare, rather than decidedly favoring consolidation and capital-holders.