4 ms·
This supposes that there's some naturally-right size for a corporation to be No, in fact, it doesn't. Please re-read the comment you're replying to. There is
by crotchfire 3y ago
This supposes that there's some naturally-right size for a corporation to be
No, in fact, it doesn't. Please re-read the comment you're replying to.
There is no cutoff, limit, or threshhold. It doesn't prescribe a naturally-right size any more than a graduated income tax "prescribes a naturally-right amount of income".
- samatman 3y agoYes, in fact, it does. The objection just flies directly into the blindspot which leads you to make the proposal in the first place, which produces cognitive dissonance. You postulate, incorrectly, that "too large" is a coherent concept for corporations, and propose to "fix" your imaginary problem by punishing people who grow corporations larger than your imagined ideal.
- OJFord 3y agoIs a 'cap' not a 'cutoff, limit, or threshold'?
- crotchfire 3y agoPlease read the comment again; you have not understood it. No cap is proposed.
- elefanten 3y agoNo but you have to pick where and how quickly to ramp the tax schedule which will eventually lead to you having to make some “assumptions” about what size (range) is “too big”
- crotchfire 3y agoyou have to pick where Everywhere. and how quickly to ramp Yes, that is the one and only tuneable variable. It's a single, obvious scalar, like the interest rate set by a central bank. There's no room for favoritism or shenanighans. Of course, like central bank interest rates, it will be an object of impassioned political debate. That's expected. which will eventually lead to you having to make some “assumptions” about what size (range) is “too big” Absolutely false. You're confusing a value with its rate of change. The speed limit on the highway doesn't constrain the length of the road.