|
|
|
|
|
|
by nocoolnametom
111 days ago
|
|
|
Perhaps, but the entire ecosystem of associated buzzwords/ideas is pretty popular in our culture today: "job creator" C-suite executives magically "create" jobs and/or raise pay because their budget for taxes goes down and they just don't know where else to put the cash, thus everyone benefits. Is it a straw man? Sure. Is it the same pablum often delivered by the evening news and politicians? Yes. Is reality a TON more complicated and often counter-intuitive? Yep. (Raising wages doesn't seem to have a _direct_ correlation to inflation, it's correlated but often lagging and muted in response; job creation seems to be mostly a market effect not corporate decision; the modern definition of "fiduciary duty" means extra cash should go toward immediate stockholder benefit so stock buybacks are always FAR more likely than employee benefits; etc; etc). The one area I'd push back strong on is that nobody is "advocating" for it. Many stockholding orgs/individuals are. They don't care if its a straw man, they know what the real-world systemic effects are of lower taxation rates. |
|
|
The real concept, which is actually true, is business owners and managers and investors have money - whether risking money for a startup, or spending revenue from customers - and that money goes into investing in infrastructure and paying salaries, and paying taxes. Their taxes then pay for the public sector employees' jobs and all other public costs. That hierarchy is why making sure people want spend their time and money in your country, because it pays for everything else.