Noah, consider how large firms, with the aid of Govt regulations, are suppressing competition and innovation.
Legendary shareholder activist Robert AG Monks is a good place to start:
http://tokyotom.freecapitalists.org/2014/04/19/drone-corporation-wanna-govt-save-me-please/ … #corpgov @corpgovnet @nminow
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Why do we assume that it’s low tax rates that increase innovation and not proximity to knowledge hubs? There are currently plenty of low tax nations with little to no innovation. Meanwhile it’s not like the US didn’t have massive innovation in the period between 1945 and 1980.
-
Right but there was a markedly large increase in innovation and entrepreneurship throughout the 80s and into the 90s
-
That may have been coincidental in a static model. Alternately there may be a model of cascading innovation where lower taxes = more money for R&D = more innovation. I could buy this model. Both models still rely on knowledge hubs to capitalize on this tax advantage.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Increased innovation in tax avoidance/evasion as well, I’d wager.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
That doesn't sound right. Companies were already sitting on piles of cash not used for "innovation". The money was used for stock buy backs, not innovation.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Me: why was this 1950 hi tech lab equipment built in brooklyn My boss, Leonard Lerman: only place in US where you could walk down the street and find all the engineers and suppliers you needed also, dim memory New Yorker article about Fisher Stereo, the birth of HiFi in NYC
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
So when budgets tighten research is cut. Who knew?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
So if I snarkily said "Tax dividends as regular income" Would I be missing something obvious
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Ok, but with increasing inequality who’s going to benefit of the innovation?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Doesn't sound like a great trade off.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
“Probably?”unless it’s you left with the short end - there’s no justification for impoverishing hard working people !
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Two evils don't make a right.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
California has a much higher tax rate than, say, Florida and far more innovation. States with higher tax rates innovate much, much more--the empirical evidence is contrary to the second paper that is loaded with assumptions, suppositions and tangential relationships.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Nallareddy-Rouen-Serrato is persuasive bc they add to a growing corpus of findings indicating owners, not workers, capture the larger part of corporate income increases. 1/
-
Alcigit-Grigsby-Nicholas-Stantcheva don’t persuade me. They confuse patents granted with innovations. The two are quite different. Patents use government protections to capture & exploit monopolies & to discourage ideas competing with the patented idea. 2/end
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If increasing inequality comes from more productivity, then good.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.