Struggle against super incomes

Questions from "The Question":

Is it right to impose an increased tax on companies that do not create a number of jobs corresponding to their income in order to fight against excess profits?

This is a very controversial solution, especially nowadays, when people have finally learned how to use automation and have just started to implement it everywhere in their business. For example, your approach will prohibit the companies Gett, Uber, Yandex Taxi, as well as Sberbank to use automated systems and especially neural networks, as they lead to staff reduction. So, instead of the program, for these functions will be responsible for a regiment of low- or medium-skilled professionals. This is, of course, a utopia. But even if we omit the point that modern technology is just responsible for minimizing jobs and improving the efficiency of the company (which should lead to the abolition of "routine" and the flowering of creative and intellectual in the long term), there is another problem.

Business is not something abstract. There is industry, agriculture, technology sector, information and TV, advertising agencies and so on. Each sphere is very individual. If we dig deeper, we will see that each segment of the economy and business areas also have their divisions into "types of companies" and approaches. Sometimes they can be very, very different, and most importantly - the costs, the number of employees needed for effective business will also vary. And do not depend on the turnover of the company, but on the needs of business at this particular moment and at this stage of company development.

Continuing, we can also meet one more interesting moment. It can be seen first of all in the sphere of startups. When using new approaches and sometimes automation, there is a qualitative decline in companies with a large number of employees, while a small team or several small teams are more efficient (which means that the turnover of such a company will be disproportionate to the staff). The reason for this phenomenon is more effective social ties in companies with a small group of creative people. While the problem with a large company is not even that many people are engaged in routine work (although this is a hindrance), but that a complex structure can harm the speed of decision-making and sometimes the "correctness" of such decisions.

These examples show that the approach you have proposed nowadays will unfortunately harm the business as a whole. It will slow down the development of small but effective teams, increase the costs of large companies, and lead to other troubles - the result of which will become more complicated to do business, and sometimes bankruptcy of the company, because it will be difficult or impossible to do business effectively with such inadequate measures.

Author: Sergey Ulyashenkov