I've never understood the argument that we musn't make billionaire individuals or huge multinational corporations pay too much tax, because if we do they'll withdraw their investment from our economy.
Suppose the UK government decided to tax Amazon properly, and Bezos responded by closing Amazon.co.uk altogether and no longer operating here. What would happen? There's already thousands of other companies involved in e-commerce here, just none quite as huge or centralised as Amazon. The DEMAND wouldn't disappear just because Amazon does, so surely those other companies would just expand to meet it, or UK-based startups, paying UK tax, would do so?
And empirically, this is what seems to happen in eg the Scandinavian countries where high wealth and income is taxed, while at the same time regulation and barries to entry are minimized to make starting small businesses easy. Plenty of successful businesses leading the world in their field, funded by people paying their tax and getting on with life because they're happy to have stable, relatively fair societies and a high standard of living.
I get that some of those who hold vast amounts of wealth invest that wealth in things that provide jobs and stimulate the economy. What I don't get is the idea that they are the ONLY people who can. Capitalist economics tells us that where there is demand, someone will meet it with supply. Yet the argument above, made by those supposedly defending capitalism, seems to contradict it.
Can someone make it make sense?