Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (359101)	11/22/2007 11:55:47 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573980

Lowering corporate incomes taxes, like lowering any other expense, helps corporations. Some will fail anyway, that isn't an argument against lowering the tax. Bottom line is that reasonable, or even low corporate income taxes do hurt companies that can't pass on the cost, and when they can pass on the tax than it hurts consumers and/or employees. There is no free lunch. In order to get the wealth for the government you take it out of the private sector. And because of compliance costs and other forms of dead weight loss involved in taxation you have to take more out of the private sector than you get to use in the public sector. If the tax paid is X, and the dead weight loss is Y, you can still find public sector activities where spending X, gives you more than the X+Y cost to the private sector, so there obviously is a role for government. But when you consider the dead weight loss than government taxing and spending plans have to meet a higher standard. And a good deal of government spending doesn't even meet the standard of providing as much benefit as the tax income would have in the private sector even when the dead weight losses aren't considered.