Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
But you still haven't addressed the tax issue.
|
Which tax issue? One of Amazon's early advantages was not charging sales tax when it didn't literally have to. I'm pretty sure that's largely gone away (it has here in Minnesota, where it's now required to charge sales tax) as its physical footprint has expanded to pretty much every state. And as states have adopted sales and use taxes intended to apply to it, I think it's mostly acquiesced rather than tried to challenge them (again, that might just be the expanding physical presence).
Is there some other tax issue you're thinking of?
Quote:
|
Amazon removes massive amounts of jobs
|
Well, it also employs a lot of people and, as we've discussed ad-naseum we're not seeing huge spikes in joblessness (last measured prime age employment to population ratio is less than half a percentage point below the pre-recession peak EDIT: Correction, point and a half. Read the chart wrong. Point being, there's slack but it's not it's not "massive").
Quote:
|
taxable events by gobbling up market share
|
You used to buy toilet paper at Target. Taxable event. You now buy toilet paper from Amazon. Taxable event. What about it taking retail market share reduces taxable events?
Quote:
|
I don't know what the solution would be, as this cannot be tackled by merely raising taxes on the affluent, or anyone else.
|
It's amazing that you think of everything except all of the various tax cuts of the last two decades as reducing tax revenue.
Quote:
|
I think at a minimum, Wal Mart should be hit with a tax in the exact amount of transfer costs provided to its employees because the company refuses to pay anything close to a living wage.
|
Or just raise the minimum wage.
