Monday, March 07, 2011

In fact, it makes better sense to have a corporate income tax than it does a personal one, except for high personal incomes

Because it's companies, businesses that make the lion's share of the money. Not taxing corporations and expecting ordinary citizens to come up with the money, especially if the tax system isn't progressive, is what's unreasonable. How is it that certain large corporations can get away with paying no tax whatsoever while the states and the federal government have to scrimp and save to keep programs?

3 comments:

Tristan said...

Unfortunately corporations will pass on the tax to their workers and customers and keep their profits (probably also developing new ways to avoid tax).

Tristan said...

...to follow on...

We need a way to remove power from the corporations and the state which support each other.

We need to move support functions out of the state and into communities and at the same time undermine the power of the corporations.
Quite how I don't know unfortunately.

John Madziarczyk said...

But we don't know if they'll automatically do that. They could, but consumers do have some power, although not as much as people say they do, and workers have some but unfortunately not nearly enough, unless they're really organized. I don't know if they could pass it all on without there being some backlash forcing them to go back partially.

I think a lot of the problems with the transition between State and local could be bridged if power was taken away from the federal government and given back to the states themselves to oversee. It's a bad situation where the only way to get some benefits that are the norm elsewhere is to build a large, overarching, bureaucracy.

On the other hand, the U.S. is like the EU, and states are typically (with lots and lots of variation) about half the size of countries in the EU like Great Britain, so universal health care passing in the UK isn't on the same scale as health care passing in the EU as a whole.

The whole federal/state split in the U.S. is troubling, and was meant to be disempowering IMHO. Howard Zinn made a statement to the effect that the Federalist Papers basically set up a system that disempowers local initiative, and although I can't think of the individual ones off the top of my head I know that they're there.