Controversial Political Statements IV

   So this is the weekend that traditionally I chair at the CCCPMUN (Contra Costa County Model United Nations) Conference. Much as we know I love MUN, after some very serious debate I decided to go on the Seattle road trip this weekend with Rob Roy & co. For the first time in four years or so I didn't go the the CCCPMUN conference.
   This morning the Seattle road trip was cancelled at the last minute. Its too late now to go to the CCCPMUN conference. I promptly wept bitter tears of sadness. Not really but I instant messeges "blugh!!" to Kristy about a million times throughout the day.


Controvercial Political Statements IV - or more reasons Senator Birman will someday object to my confirmation as US Chief Justice
   So I'm all about the capitalist system as it is usually the most efficient way to organize the economy and through its round-about ways tends to be best for everyone. Monopolies, however, mangle the system at its roots by eliminating competition, which is rather the basis of the system. Whats worse, monopolies are a natural product of the capitalist system, as successful enterprises buy out or destroy their competitors. In this manner the capitalist system is self destructive. That is, unless monopolies are thwarted. This is currently done through anti-trust legislation. Admittedly I don't know the details of how this works but I think the government pwns a company when it gets too big. On any account, I think the prevention of monopolies should be built into the system.

   How do I propose to do this you ask? Progressive taxation for corporations. Like how personal income is taxed at a higher rate the more you make. "WTF?" you say? "How are you going to apply this to corporations?" you ask.
   Corporate income will be taxed at an increasingly higher rate based on their closeness to having a monopoly. When a company's sales reaches 50% of the total market in that field it will pay 100% income tax (ie half its profits). Yes this is super steep, but the point is I don't think any company should be anywhere near 50% of the market in any given field. At lower percentages of the market share corporations shall pay taxes at a lower percentage (not necessarily decreasing in a straight line. Actual numbers to be set by specially bred team of economic supergeniuses). The market share shall be calculated at both a national & county level, if possible.

   In this manner corporations shall retain the basic competitive motivations that drive capitalism while retaining an inherent interest in not expanding beyond a certain point.

   There will of course be exceptions for businesses in locations and industries where there are so few competitors anyway that the difference is not statistically significant¹.

   Anyway, thats the basic idea. Discuss.

¹Interestingly, the Cal Aggie seemed to have absolutely no conception of statistical significance when they recently published an article about how we're all going to die because the suicide rate at Davis doubled from 2 to 4 last year. I bet the statistics department collectively killed themselves after reading that one.