| reply to pnh102
Re: Shocking? said by pnh102:This is just another illustration of the folly of taxing businesses. They have and always will simply pass those taxes down to the consumers in the form of higher prices. Lol. You really do hate human beings, don`t you? When exactly did your love-fest with corporatism and fascism begin? The fact that you`re completely wrong about corporate taxes also doesn`t seem to phase you.
If corporations really could pass on all taxes down to the consumer, that would mean they would have room to raise prices. If they could raise prices, why would they wait until they were taxed? Why leave money on the table? The reality is they can`t just arbitrarily raise prices without expecting to lose customers and revenue, so they`re forced to eat the taxes.
The only reason AT&T is able to lay this tax bungle on their customers is because they`re being allowed to hide the price increase as a seperate line item, the `special municipal fee`, that they of course do not advertise when selling their product.
These kinds of hidden fees always surprise and confuse customers, making it more difficult for them to make rational choices.
If AT&T were force to include this $6 raise into their base prices and advertise the price increase when trying to sell their product, they would without a doubt experience a loss of revenue from customer dropout. In other words, they would just prefer to eat the taxes. |
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by sonicmerlin:Lol. You really do hate human beings, don`t you? Hardly. They taste great with ketchup.
said by sonicmerlin:The fact that you`re completely wrong about corporate taxes also doesn`t seem to phase you. I forgot. Corporations have this big magic pot of money laying around that they can pay all their bills with. Getting money from consumer in exchange for providing a product and service has zero to do with it. Since this isn't true, it pretty much negates the rest of your post entirely.
Go take an introductory economics course and try again.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Comcast
 ·AT&T Southeast
| reply to sonicmerlin
said by sonicmerlin:said by pnh102:This is just another illustration of the folly of taxing businesses. They have and always will simply pass those taxes down to the consumers in the form of higher prices. The fact that you`re completely wrong about corporate taxes also doesn`t seem to phase you. Which corporation are you CFO of? |
|
1 edit | reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:said by sonicmerlin:Lol. You really do hate human beings, don`t you? Hardly. They taste great with ketchup. said by sonicmerlin:The fact that you`re completely wrong about corporate taxes also doesn`t seem to phase you. I forgot. Corporations have this big magic pot of money laying around that they can pay all their bills with. Getting money from consumer in exchange for providing a product and service has zero to do with it. Since this isn't true, it pretty much negates the rest of your post entirely. Go take an introductory economics course and try again. Ah yes, wave your hands around in dismissive ignorance, while subtly proclaiming the intellectual inferiority of your opponent. All the while completely ignoring the substance of the argument. How predictably self-serving of you.
What I see are essentially natural monopolies or oligopolies, private companies providing an infrastructure service while siphoning billions and billions every year from the economy. They conduct no research of their own, add no value to society, and exist seemingly only to leech money from the system that props up their business. |
|
| reply to NOCTech75
said by NOCTech75:said by sonicmerlin:said by pnh102:This is just another illustration of the folly of taxing businesses. They have and always will simply pass those taxes down to the consumers in the form of higher prices. The fact that you`re completely wrong about corporate taxes also doesn`t seem to phase you. Which corporation are you CFO of? Oh brilliant. I must be a corporate CFO in order to understand the basic premise of corporate taxation. It all makes sense to me now. |
|
|
|
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to sonicmerlin
said by sonicmerlin:Ah yes, wave your hands around in dismissive ignorance, while subtly proclaiming the intellectual inferiority of your opponent. Subtle? I would say I was pretty direct when I suggested you acquaint yourself with the basic workings of business.
said by sonicmerlin: All the while completely ignoring the substance of the argument. How predictably self-serving of you. This doesn't change the irrefutable fact that all businesses pass taxes right on down to the consumer in the form of higher prices. This is just how things work in business.
If the great State of Missouri really did not want to see AT&T customers living there be subject to this fee, then it should grant a tax amnesty to AT&T instead of making its customers cough up more money.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. |
|
grawksPremium
join:2009-09-11
US | i would say that if its a tax thats being passed down to comsumers it should be labeled as a tax not a fee. now if its a fee for anything ex: janitorial fee, it should be labeled as a fee. the big problem is lack of transparency for the consumer. is it legal to have fine print? yes. is it ethical? maybe, thats up for individual interpretation. all that matters is that this should not be called a fee and it should be called a tax. a tax that can and will be looked up on google for the meaning of. will some people leave yes, will some people stay yes. this argument is pointless because we cant speak for the people of MO. its there choice, not ours, deal with it. everybody get off your high horse and lets see what happens. |
|
