By now saying “business activity” you have moved the goal posts from talking about “big corporations” where most people work, to all business activity. That’s bullshit.
Business activity is what businesses engage in. It’s not a movement of the goalposts whatsoever.
The point, which you now seem to be agreeing with, is that corporations pay for the government. Period. Either directly from their own taxes or on a pass-through basis by income taxes paid by their employees. That was my original contention, and if we agree, then good. Let’s move on.
It is not 100% counterproductive to work against any entity which exploits other entities or people, whether that entity is a parent, a religious institution, or a multinational corporation.
Well, then don’t expect them to provide much money to the Treasury for those social programs you want to fund. :-)
What you’re kicking off here is a very highly charged set of issues, and highly debatable. For example, is trying to pay the least amount possible for labor exploitative, or is it a necessary part of good business management?
The problem here is that the answer is “both”. So, a good capitalist wants the lightest regulatory touch possible which abrogates the most egregious of the negative elements of good business management, while a crappy capitalist tries to eliminate ALL the exploitative elements through reguation and then pretends that doing so has no impact on business efficiency.
The latter is bunk, of course.
We are a society, and all entities that exist in that society should be contributing to the greater good.
Yes, that’s what Lenin, Marx, Stalin, Castro, and Mao all would have argued. My contention is that the objectives of business, government, and the worker are *largely* (not completely, but largely) in alignment, but instead of government working to further align those objectives, we have a problem where one political party constantly ignores this and attempts to pit one against the other so they can garner more votes. Reprehensible behavior, in my opinion.
There are more than “both parties” in the country. I have no idea why you would want to limit yourself to two opinions only.
I have no intention of limiting myself to anything.
Eliminating corporate tax would be completely unfair.
Perhaps, although that as a humble person, I recognize that the concept of “fair” is subjective, and one best left to priests and philosophers. Most people who talk about “fairness” do so from a totally biased perspective.
If corporations were to pay no taxes on their earnings like everyone else, why should they get to have the advantages of the society that allows them to make those earnings?
Because if we didnt’ give them those advantages, they’d go out of business (or move overseas entirely) and leave us all unemployed and hungry? :-)