Re: "Branch" line
"Taxes are now used to pay for necessities which make it possible to have a successful society: Roads, infrastructure, a functional justice system."
Duck houses, moats, bloating public sector, porn for MP's lonely husbands, etc.
"Doing so for large companies would cost them a rounding error in accountants and have much higher returns."
That is an interesting justification. What returns are so high as to be 'a rounding error'? Is it the wage of their cleaner crew? Checkout person? Who should be out of a job to pay this tax? Who decides the subjective amount that is too much? I bet I could justify that you earn too much so remove some of your money. Doesnt make it right, still stealing even if you justify it as 'they can afford it'.
"You need to invest to get returns."
Well said. And to invest you need money. To have money you need to earn enough to pay your bills. One such bill is tax. Tax which gets spend least productively in an economy compared to private individuals/companies who can increase employment (something the gov cannot do).
"You need to pay taxes to have a functioning country."
Yes. So define functioning? Boobjobs on the NHS? How about bailing out failing private industry (I will muse that the porn industry apparently asked for support in the US)? Bloated public sector can be justified by improving employment figures, until you see the crippling damage it causes. Add the general fact that lower tax allows more growth (by not restricting it) and so stops the country looking like Greece. Not a functioning country but love their public services.
"You might claim that not investing, not paying salaries, and not paying taxes is the right thing to do in order to have more money, by simply spending less."
You misunderstand our positions. Apart from the taxes bit you are claiming those are the right things to do. I argue that more investment leads to higher salaries leading to more tax take to have more money and allow more spending. But how can someone invest in themselves and the world around them when their earnings are confiscated?
"What is exactly produced by Luxembourg and the Cayman Islands, do you think? Do you believe these places to be struggling?"
Investment opportunity. They are not struggling because they are worth putting your money into. They are attractive protection from thieves. Ask yourself why do people want to send their money there? And if the money is going their it is leaving somewhere (I hope you agree). Yet having money flowing in to the country increases the countries wealth/growth/employment/taxable revenue. So why do we try to push all those positives away and try to punish people for making money? Why do we attack people who generate wealth and why do we hate investment?
Biting the hand that feeds IT
