It does gast the flabber somewhat that a company worth allegedly ten billion quid can be spending more than its turnover on running a glorified website.
OK, I know it’s more than that, but that’s what it boils down to.
Pat
A comment on your article touches on the the integral point. The economic argument is easy and you have won it many times over. But that isn’t the battle being fought. To fight the political argument the point to be leveraged is the value to the consumer of Twitter (Google, Amazon or whoever else) aside from taxation.
It does gast the flabber somewhat that a company worth allegedly ten billion quid can be spending more than its turnover on running a glorified website.
OK, I know it’s more than that, but that’s what it boils down to.
A comment on your article touches on the the integral point. The economic argument is easy and you have won it many times over. But that isn’t the battle being fought. To fight the political argument the point to be leveraged is the value to the consumer of Twitter (Google, Amazon or whoever else) aside from taxation.
Bryan Caplan wrote a great book about your last phrase: The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies