3 ms·

Taxing companies is what you need to do - since they would otherwise engage the people that you need for the public service you want to provide. Having said th

Taxing companies is what you need to do - since they would otherwise engage the people that you need for the public service you want to provide. Having said that the corporate tax is the worst way of doing that. Far better just to tax companies for using certain types of employee so they don't use that type of employee that much. Which then leaves some of those types of employees unemployed by the private sector. At which point the public sector can hire them instead. All straightforward once you realise tax has nothing to do with money or funding and everything to do with releasing people from the private sector so they can be hired by the public sector.

nsonha 5y ago
I've never heard of this argument and can't say it makes sense. "releasing people from the private sector" just mean removing jobs (and maybe bussiness activities) I doubt the jobs lost will be offset by the public sector and creating public jobs isn't incentivized in a free market. More public jobs just means tax money allocated more poorly any won't guarantee improved public services.
- neilwilson 5y ago
  "I doubt the jobs lost will be offset by the public sector" If you doubt that, then the government is overtaxing for the size of government they want. If tax eliminates private jobs, then it is beholden on government to hire those so released. If too many are released - reduce taxes. "More public jobs just means tax money allocated more poorly any won't guarantee improved public services." As I said tax doesn't pay for anything. The purpose of tax is to release people to be hired by the public sector - in furtherance of the elected mandate of the government. If the government has been elected then you've already lost the argument about whether public services will be improved with more people or not.
  - nsonha 5y ago
    > As I said tax doesn't pay for anything. The purpose... already established your theory in the first comment, no need to waste a comment to repeat the exact same thing. Might be more helpful to use the comment to elaborate instead. > government is overtaxing for the size of government they want... the purpose of tax is to release people to be hired by the public sector This is the first time I hear this bizarre theory. If this is the case, there must be countless documents backing this, care to cite?

nsonha 5y ago

I've never heard of this argument and can't say it makes sense. "releasing people from the private sector" just mean removing jobs (and maybe bussiness activities) I doubt the jobs lost will be offset by the public sector and creating public jobs isn't incentivized in a free market. More public jobs just means tax money allocated more poorly any won't guarantee improved public services.

neilwilson 5y ago
"I doubt the jobs lost will be offset by the public sector" If you doubt that, then the government is overtaxing for the size of government they want. If tax eliminates private jobs, then it is beholden on government to hire those so released. If too many are released - reduce taxes. "More public jobs just means tax money allocated more poorly any won't guarantee improved public services." As I said tax doesn't pay for anything. The purpose of tax is to release people to be hired by the public sector - in furtherance of the elected mandate of the government. If the government has been elected then you've already lost the argument about whether public services will be improved with more people or not.
- nsonha 5y ago
  > As I said tax doesn't pay for anything. The purpose... already established your theory in the first comment, no need to waste a comment to repeat the exact same thing. Might be more helpful to use the comment to elaborate instead. > government is overtaxing for the size of government they want... the purpose of tax is to release people to be hired by the public sector This is the first time I hear this bizarre theory. If this is the case, there must be countless documents backing this, care to cite?