[crazygringo]

> Unironically yes.

Do you realize that won't produce more revenue, it will just bankrupt companies and produce less revenue?

Companies are already incentivized not to waste by competition. That's the whole point of capitalism. You don't need taxes for that.

[const_cast]

A lot of companies are essentially on the welfare of their investors, who may or may not be stupid. Many companies purposefully do not turn a profit, because they're aiming to cheat the market and sell at a loss to push competitors out. A lot of very successful companies operate or have operated this way, and it's incredibly dangerous for the market. It causes the erosion of small businesses and further promotes monopolization. We can try to disincentive that by saying, "hey, you don't want to turn a profit, that's fine, but you still have to pay up".

This is part of the reason why if you look around America today it's going to be 99% big corporate players dominating markets and 1% small businesses barely staying afloat.

[crazygringo]

> We can try to disincentive that by saying, "hey, you don't want to turn a profit, that's fine, but you still have to pay up".

That doesn't make any sense. You're saying, instead of consumers getting lower prices, they should pay more and that money should go towards taxes. That means, essentially, that you're asking the consumers to pay taxes.

What you're describing is predatory pricing. People have mixed views on that, but if you want to address it, then address it directly. Taxing revenue is a strange, roundabout way of doing it that is going to harm a ton of non-predatory businesses without actually changing the market dynamics of predatory pricing -- because your taxes will be affecting the non-predatory companies even more! Since they, by definition, charge more money and therefore will be paying more taxes on the greater revenue.

[const_cast]

The problem is that our current tax system incentivizes the kind of venture-capital fueled market manipulation we see. Companies actively try to optimize for the lowest amount of profit, similarly to how the ultra-wealthy try to optimize for the lowest income.

We have some methods to address predatory pricing but I think it's obvious they pretty much don't work on any scale that matters. When I look around the modern US, I see the least amount of successful small businesses I've ever seen in my lifetime. We're living in a corporate hellscape, and more and more business look to rent-seeking anti-consumerist behavior.

[crazygringo]

> The problem is that our current tax system incentivizes the kind of venture-capital fueled market manipulation we see.

It really doesn't at all. It's quite neutral in that regard.

> Companies actively try to optimize for the lowest amount of profit

This is self-evidently false. Companies actively optimize for the greatest total profit, considering the net present value of future profits. This does mean delaying profits if reinvesting them is expected to yield growth. This is desirable.

> We have some methods to address predatory pricing but I think it's obvious they pretty much don't work on any scale that matters.

Honestly it hasn't been a major policy priority. They could absolutely work if implemented, but not everyone agrees it's a problem that needs solving. Many people consider it to be hostile to a free market. I'm not taking sides here.

> When I look around the modern US, I see the least amount of successful small businesses I've ever seen in my lifetime.

The major culprit here is technology and economies of scale. The tax code has some quirks, but it is essentially irrelevant here. Even if predatory pricing accelerates the demise of some small businesses, they weren't going to last much longer anyways. Which is why predatory pricing isn't actually nearly as common as many people think, and why it's not always viewed as a problem. E.g. Uber and Lyft engaged in it for years, but traditional taxis are still in business. Small businesses have been disappearing because they simply don't have economies of scale. Their products cost more so people don't go there. It's that simple. Nothing to do with the tax code.