Posted by Dinah on November 10, 2011, at 8:54:14
In reply to Corporatehood, posted by floatingbridge on November 9, 2011, at 12:52:23
By saying that corporations are people, wasn't he saying that there is no such thing as a corporation existing on its own? That corporations are in those mutual funds that granny and grandad are funding their retirement with? That your own retirement funds might be in? That they are really just an amalgam of ownership of countless individuals, both big and small?
There is already double taxation on corporations. One when the corporation earns the money, and one when that money is distributed to its stockholders? That's the idea behind including dividends as capital gains. That there have already been taxes paid on that money. I'm not sure I agree with the policy, but I think it's founded on the idea that corporations may be legal entities, but they are really bits and pieces of ownership by countless individuals.
Not to mention the employees who owe their livelihood to said corporations.
As for not paying taxes, those tax breaks result from unfunded governmental programs. Hiring people from certain disadvantaged neighborhoods. Energy credits. Credits for investing money in bad economic times. Corporations might make use of them, but if the government didn't want the underlying result of the tax credits they wouldn't have them. Government sees it as a cheap way to obtain desirable goals.
I'm thinking perhaps he didn't explain himself well, but there was nothing wrong with his statement.
poster:Dinah
thread:1002028
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20110926/msgs/1002117.html