Quin, now you are arguing with your own column. You write, “It really is a problem, both morally and politically, when corporate execs get $70 million parachutes when they flee failed companies.” You aren’t saying that is too much money? You further state, “the solution is to give companies an incentive not to lavish so much wealth on so few individuals.” Excessive wealth, maybe? Now you are saying that you don’t want to give companies an incentive to “keep executive compensation lower” and that you are only trying to provide “populist cover” for free-market Social Security reform. Aside from blowing your own cover, you have backed away from a key rationale for your own idea.
Anyway, since we’re nowhere close to abolishing the corporate income tax, it’s all a moot point. But do get back to me and let me know which Quin wins the argument.
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://spectatorworld.com/.