I like taxes. I don't like big buisness. If big oil was unscrupulous in their dealings and artificially inflated prices and did other things illegal and/or unethical then there should be some penalty, financial and otherwise, but the notion of placing an extra tax on their profit is wrong. Now, that doesn't mean I don't think thier profit shouldn't be heavily taxed. In fact, I believe that any corporate profit over, say, $1 billion (or 10%, whichever is less) should be heavily taxed...maybe 65%. Is that what a "windfall tax" is? Maybe. It is not presented like that, though. Both by name and by perception the tax which has been proposed would be a disincentive to companies to expand and innovate (which is often where corporate profits go). Expansion and innovation bolster the economy and create jobs. A set tax for huge profits would not prevent this from happening (though it may reduce it a bit), but a random tax assessed whenever Congress feels that a particular company's/industry's profits are excessive will.
I don't generally mind high gas prices. I drive very little in a smaller car. High gas prices will motivate others to do the same, which I think is good. However, I do think that the high prices should result in more money for the government, not profits for big oil. There is something rotten in Denmark...something immoral about huge corporations reaping record profits when most Americans have to scrape by to pay for heating, and to afford the fuel to take them to work. Ethics and capitalism are not the best of friends. Taxation is not terribly kind, either but it is one method to at least benefit from the corporate nastyness that can produce 10-25% profits.
I realize there is randomness here. It keeps the internet from sapping too much entropy from the world.
No comments:
Post a Comment