Keiser Report Christmas Edition with Russell Brand
Comment: 1134 days ago
“If you believe that corporations sit outside of society” That is not what I said or meant. Corporations exist as a subset of a larger society; however so do I. I do not have do whatever the pressures of society makes me do unless there is a legal requirement to do it. Corporations are the same way.
“where a corporation can sue a foreign country if its laws affect the corporation's profits - makes sense.” Yes, that does make sense. You can sue foreign countries that agreed to abide by particular contracts and then did something against that contract. You couldn’t sue North Korea, for example, because they did not enter into the agreement.
“If corporations sit outside of society, there's nobody to oversee them. They are acting as dictators.” You are clearly not understanding it. Corporations are part of society but they do not have to do what society wants them to do. There is oversight and laws that they must abide by and libertarians do not want lawlessness and anarchy. I’m not sure why you keep thinking that. I just think that corporations should be allowed to pay whatever they want to pay their CEOs and you as a bystander that has no financial interest in that company shouldn’t have any voice in CEO pay. You can, however, boycott any company that you disagree with and if too many other people do the same thing then that company will need to change or go bankrupt.
“So if the people decide that corporations should only be required to benefit a tiny few, and that there should be no minimum wage - then so be it.” There is a minimum wage so no problem for you and your views. Corporations benefit all employees and all customers so no problem for your views.
“I wouldn't put a limit on what people can earn. I don't mind as long as in earning that money, they respect their staff, pay reasonable wages, don't damage the environment, don't damage people's health, etc.” Awesome then you don’t care what a CEO makes. I am finally getting through to you.
“If you made millions, had 1 employee and paid him minimum wage, so that taxpayers had to help out in benefits, I'd have a problem with that.” That’s where we disagree because you have some delusion that all employees contribute to the financial success of the company. What if my employee was my nanny or lawn care service? Should I give that person half of my billions just because he’s my only employee? Have you considered that those people felt they were getting paid what they deserve for their job and that’s why they do it otherwise they would quit and go somewhere else. I do not see any reason a business owner needs to share profits with the employees.
Oh, this brings up a good question. If you think employees should be paid part of the profits, what if the company has a loss, should the employees be required to pay for that loss out of their pockets too?
“If you made your millions by overcharging the taxpayer because your device was desperately needed, then I'd have a problem with that.” Overcharging is subjective. Of course you would ask for as much as you possibly can and through the negotiation process, you would come upon a price that both the government and the business owner feels is acceptable for both parties. Look at how Ross Perot got his billions for an example.
“If your business was struggling, and you couldn't afford to pay your staff a living wage, I wouldn't have a problem with the taxpayer helping out until you could afford to pay a living wage.” You say that the taxpayer helps out as if it’s helping the corporation but it’s not. It’s helping the worker. The worker may not be able to work all the hours necessary to get paid a living wage or have the skills necessary to get enough money to earn a living wage. You’re not subsiding the corporation in these cases but you are helping the uneducated, lazy, and unskilled.
“So I would tax a billionaire's income at a higher rate than his secretary's,” Where did you get the idea that someone that earns a billion in income pays a lower rate than his secretary? Warren Buffett? You should try fact checking that. According to the IRS, the tax rate for someone that makes over 406,750 is 39.6%. A secretary making 30K would only pay 13.5%. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1040tt.pdf
“Libertarians see tax as theft of their hard earned money. Socialists see tax as a contribution to the building and maintenance of society.” If everyone paid the same tax dollar amount, I would agree. However, the amount of taxes that I pay is larger than many of my friend’s entire annual salary. Is that fair? Do I get any more benefits from that extra money? Does the government defend me more than anyone else? Do I get better police service than my neighbor? Does my vote count more when deciding who I want as President? Nope. I get no additional benefits for paying more money than everyone else. I think that is what’s unfair.
Let’s use another hypothetical situation so you can see how taxes are unfair. You go to Walmart to buy a bundle of bananas. The cashier asks to see your last pay stub and you ask why. She then says it’s so they can determine how much to charge you for those bananas. If you earn more, you should pay more. They are the same bananas that everyone else gets but, in your society, you should pay more than others just because you earn more. Does that sound fair?