5000

Yeah, that’s what I mean. Apple might feel like they should raise the price of the next iPhone by $50 to cover new taxes, but it’s possible that the market would not be open to that. In which case, they will take it on the chin, up until selling iPhones isn’t profitable enough for them to care anymore.

5001

If it’s impossible to raise taxes at all then the abolishment of the nation-state seems the logical end destination.

Ie, liberals need to have a bit more stomach about doing things that might temporarily hurt that lower classes. If liberals policy makes the bottom 30% or so sacred cows that Must Be Protected you’re really never going to be able to address… anything, from political to economic to ecological, because mass consumption consumerism pretty much is the most efficient form of economic distribution.

5002

Unspoken rules aren’t rules. If you think a company should do something you have to make it a law or they generally won’t care. Some will, but most won’t.

5003

To be clear, I think we should raise taxes on corporations.

I also think that it will likely result in some things being more expensive.

I’m fine with that.

5004

Sure, but it cannot be the case that espousing liberal philosophy is uttering liberal stupidities. Unless one is just asserting that liberalism, itself, is the stupidity.

5005

OK, yeah, I think that’s fair. “Corporations are benefiting too much from the hard work of American citizens and we think average workers should be getting more of the pie” is not a stupid thing to say.

Suggesting that corporations will willingly give up profits is, however, a stupid thing to say.

5006

Some are, some aren’t. The credit card processing company was in the news again, after the CEO gave everyone at the bottom of the scale a pay raise.

But, in general, I think you are correct.

5007

There are definitely stand-out examples out there, and we should reward them. I think any company that is willing to forgo maximum profits for a good reason - help the environment, help workers, give to charities, etc. should get a spotlight.

5008

It seems the best solution would be to have more options for consumers in general. More competition should reduce prices, but also allow for more types of companies, ones that don’t evade taxes or do reward employees better.

Sadly, it always seems like we are getting fewer options, not more.

5009

I have a vague intuition that economic systems over the long term need to swing between centralized, efficient production and localized, artisanal, guild-like production. Always maximizing efficiency and always creating protectionist barriers to trade for local benefit seems like to polar opposites of the same line.

5010

It’s definitely possible to raise taxes.

However, it’s foolish to not acknowledge that raising taxes on corporations will in fact translate, at least to some extent, into increased costs for consumers of the products those companies produce.

5011

I mean that’s the point - that effectively there is a “true profit margin” that cannot be argued with only accepted as a fait accompli, and so any tax increase will automatically increase the price of goods and services. So to raise taxes on corporations is just a tax on consumers. Which means consumers most marginal and least able to bear the cost will actually pay for the tax.

Which means that raising taxes on corporations is just an indirect tax on consumers. So unless you want to raise taxes on consumers you should keep corporate taxes as low as possible (preferably 0, since presumably any tax rate greater than zero is just a tax on consumers and increasing the price of goods).

Nowhere is it possible apparently that corporations just make less profit.

5012

Well, there is a point at which the market will not sustain higher prices. One might think that we’re already at that point, or at least close to it though, as corporations are unlikely to not try to get the highest prices they can.

5013

If only profits are taxed then the actual cost of the items in question doesn’t go up. So, if Companies raise prices, it is only to make X dollars more in profit. Which they could do anyway.

Take for example the cost of insulin. That didn’t go up because of taxes or increased production cost, but because there was little or no competition.

As long as there isn’t sufficient competition, companies can raise prices all they like. They can claim that it’s due to taxes, but it is not really. It is due to the fact that they are used to making X amount of dollars in profit, and want to continue making X amount of dollars. But since profit is just what is left over after paying everyone, and reinvesting in the company, then it doesn’t really impact the bottom line. It just makes wealthy people… wealthy.

If companies want to raise prices, that’s fine, but I don’t see how a tax on profits does that since a Tax on profits, in theory, should have no impact on the bottom line.

Let me know if I’m missing something.

5014

Do you not believe that prices are set by markets?

5015

If you tax the whole market, the market price will increase.

5016

It depends on what you are taxing though. Taxing Profits should not impact the cost of a product, so the only reason to raise prices is to gain more profits.
But raising prices so gives your competitors a chance to steal market share by keeping their prices the same. And since the taxes is only on profits, there is no reason not to keep prices the same, if it means a larger market share.

But that all relies on companies actually being in competition with each other.

5017

I mean, corporations exist purely to gain more profits.

Also true.

Yep.

5018

Right, but profits aren’t made in a vacuum. They can only charge as much as the market will bare, so after a certain point, corporations can’t charge anymore, even if it cuts into profit.

And as long as the only thing being taxed is profits, the company itself shouldn’t be harmed. I fact, they would probably start spending more on reinvestment of the company, since, in relationship to taxing profits, it costs less.

5019

Take out the “more” and that’s a perfectly agreeable statement. Unless you’re limiting yourself to the publicly traded corporations of end-stage capitalism.