View Single Post
  #126 (permalink)  
Old 03-16-2009, 05:01 PM
pjohns pjohns is offline
Sr. Correspondent
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 771
pjohns has a reputation beyond reputepjohns has a reputation beyond reputepjohns has a reputation beyond reputepjohns has a reputation beyond reputepjohns has a reputation beyond reputepjohns has a reputation beyond reputepjohns has a reputation beyond reputepjohns has a reputation beyond reputepjohns has a reputation beyond reputepjohns has a reputation beyond reputepjohns has a reputation beyond repute
Credits: 7,545
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by catawba View Post
Also don't forget, corporations used to have to pay an additional war tax to help fund the war. Should we start that again too?
Corporations don't pay taxes. Never have, never shall. What corporations do is to pass along that tax to the consumer--in the form of higher prices--so that it is ultimately John Q. Public who pays it.

Or, alternatively, corporations simply do not expand when the tax rate is too burdensome, and therefore hire fewer people; or give wage-per-hour workers fewer hours per week than they previously did; or both.

Of course, there is nothing inherently wrong with the concept of shared sacrifice during wartime; as regarding which, both rationing coupons and "Victory Gardens" were emblamatic. Sugar, meat, gasoline, and cigarettes (which were not then known to be the killers that they are) were diverted principally to the troops by American policy. And that is as it should be.

If one would like to set forth the proposition that some crisis of the moment demands a similar mindset, that is surely a position that is worth discussing. I would advance the negative, in such a debate.

But let us not pretend that corporations simply absorb any additional taxes that are directed their way. That is simply naive.
Reply With Quote