5 ms·

Yeah, let's increase taxes on corporations. I'm sure that the costs won't get passed on to employees. Plus, the government is so much better at spending money

by hvs 18y ago

Yeah, let's increase taxes on corporations. I'm sure that the costs won't get passed on to employees. Plus, the government is so much better at spending money than corporations that actually produce something.

josefresco 18y ago
Yeah that extra tax money they save goes into paying their employees more, expanding and creating new jobs and growing our economy... Oh wait, this is reality. It actually just ends up in their CEO's pocket which then gets passed on to their kids and other friends in high places. I'm so glad they're not paying taxes and forcing our government to 'waste' that money.
- DanielBMarkham 18y ago
  Yes, the extra money of _theirs_ that is not taxed does go into growth, or into dividends, or into salaries. In fact, for a company to be successful, they need to be better at allocating excess cash than their competitors. CEO salaries are an extremely small subset of the profits companies make. In fact, since all of the money is so well allocated, it's really impossible to tax a corporation, if you think about it. All you would do is increase their expenses, which would then be passed to their customers. You can't get money from a corporation that doesn't exist in a customer's hands at one point, and taxing companies is just another way of taxing the customers that use them. I mean really, think this through. Do you really think that the .1% of gross profits that go to a CEO makes one speck of difference in the large picture?
  - ph0rque 18y ago
    Do you really think that the .1% of gross profits that go to a CEO makes one speck of difference in the large picture? Interesting... do you have any citations? (I am genuinely curious, not looking to continue an argument.)
    - DanielBMarkham 18y ago
      I confess to pulling that one out of my ass. I'd be curious to see some stats too. But using common sense (which always isn't so good a guide) can you imagine being a board of directors that approved the CEO making 10 percent of profits? You'd have to be an idiot. (Unless he were also a founder and controlled the board) Not that boards are very popular right now -- but I don't think they're that dumb. I came up with that figure using an imaginary $10 Billion company paying their execs in the tens of million range, which seems reasonable to me.
- nazgulnarsil 18y ago
  the money used to pay CEO's is a drop in the bucket next to the operating costs of a large company. how about data instead of rhetoric?
m_eiman 18y ago
"Plus, the government is so much better at spending money than corporations that actually produce something." I'm not sure how things work in the US, but in some parts of the world the governments actually use the income from taxes to provide valuable services to their population.
- nazgulnarsil 18y ago
  and without competition it is impossible to get accurate prices to see if those services are being provided at...well, competitive prices. Most government programs involve price gouging.
  - m_eiman 18y ago
    One of the common ways for the government here to provide said services is to buy it from competing companies. So the government decides what to buy, then the fabled "market" decides the price.
    - nazgulnarsil 18y ago
      government contracting private corporations is different from normal market conditions. observe any corporation that competes for government contracts.
      - m_eiman 18y ago
        How is it different? The buyer specifies what they're looking for, and companies tell them how much they want to do the job. It's a common practice in any market.
        nazgulnarsil 18y ago
        i don't have a good intoductory book to recommend off the top of my head if you're unaware of the insanely corrupt world of government contracting. I thought it was common knowledge as it gets reported on from time to time.

by hvs 18y ago

josefresco 18y ago

Yeah that extra tax money they save goes into paying their employees more, expanding and creating new jobs and growing our economy... Oh wait, this is reality. It actually just ends up in their CEO's pocket which then gets passed on to their kids and other friends in high places. I'm so glad they're not paying taxes and forcing our government to 'waste' that money.

DanielBMarkham 18y ago
Yes, the extra money of _theirs_ that is not taxed does go into growth, or into dividends, or into salaries. In fact, for a company to be successful, they need to be better at allocating excess cash than their competitors. CEO salaries are an extremely small subset of the profits companies make. In fact, since all of the money is so well allocated, it's really impossible to tax a corporation, if you think about it. All you would do is increase their expenses, which would then be passed to their customers. You can't get money from a corporation that doesn't exist in a customer's hands at one point, and taxing companies is just another way of taxing the customers that use them. I mean really, think this through. Do you really think that the .1% of gross profits that go to a CEO makes one speck of difference in the large picture?
- ph0rque 18y ago
  Do you really think that the .1% of gross profits that go to a CEO makes one speck of difference in the large picture? Interesting... do you have any citations? (I am genuinely curious, not looking to continue an argument.)
  - DanielBMarkham 18y ago
    I confess to pulling that one out of my ass. I'd be curious to see some stats too. But using common sense (which always isn't so good a guide) can you imagine being a board of directors that approved the CEO making 10 percent of profits? You'd have to be an idiot. (Unless he were also a founder and controlled the board) Not that boards are very popular right now -- but I don't think they're that dumb. I came up with that figure using an imaginary $10 Billion company paying their execs in the tens of million range, which seems reasonable to me.
nazgulnarsil 18y ago
the money used to pay CEO's is a drop in the bucket next to the operating costs of a large company. how about data instead of rhetoric?

m_eiman 18y ago

"Plus, the government is so much better at spending money than corporations that actually produce something." I'm not sure how things work in the US, but in some parts of the world the governments actually use the income from taxes to provide valuable services to their population.

nazgulnarsil 18y ago
and without competition it is impossible to get accurate prices to see if those services are being provided at...well, competitive prices. Most government programs involve price gouging.
- m_eiman 18y ago
  One of the common ways for the government here to provide said services is to buy it from competing companies. So the government decides what to buy, then the fabled "market" decides the price.
  - nazgulnarsil 18y ago
    government contracting private corporations is different from normal market conditions. observe any corporation that competes for government contracts.
    - m_eiman 18y ago
      How is it different? The buyer specifies what they're looking for, and companies tell them how much they want to do the job. It's a common practice in any market.
      - nazgulnarsil 18y ago
        i don't have a good intoductory book to recommend off the top of my head if you're unaware of the insanely corrupt world of government contracting. I thought it was common knowledge as it gets reported on from time to time.