[cat199]

tax+spend; not supporting 'trickle down' economics w/r/t other gov't policies, actually enforcing monopoly laws, regulating other areas in favor of small business (e.g. FCC used to have media ownership laws to keep media companies smaller) etc..

if everyone has more money but there is no cap on the top, things will just get more expensive, and then more basic income will be provided, and the cycle will continue..

not necessarily a fan or a detractor of any/all of these things, but just chiming in.

[maxxxxx]

I wonder how things would work out if we had a system where companies beyond a certain size are strongly discouraged. I think the economy would be much healthier if we had many small businesses instead of behemoths like apple and Google

[pault]

I was going to say "what about research projects that only a billion dollar company can absorb", but now that I think about it an industry consortium seems like a better outcome for society than a monopoly dictating the industry's focus and creating artificial scarcity. It's undoubtedly less efficient, but spreading the work around many organizations reduces the "bus factor" and the duplicated effort of competing incompatible standards.

[Helmet]

Small business employ the plurality of Americans. Also, you made a disparaging comment towards Republicans earlier, and I just want to point out that Google, MS, Apple, etc. etc. are virtually all staffed by liberals and Democrats. Oh, and those Wallstreet bankers that seem to be perpetually in the left's cross hairs? Democrat, democrat, democrat.

[maxxxxx]

Are you disputing that the Republican tax plans are mainly aimed towards lowering taxes for upper incomes and most of the benefits would flow to the top 0.x percent? I don't think facts are disparaging.