> if you're unhappy with that amount, change the laws.

That's what they tried to do so GE left the state...

> It's not somehow patriotic to pay more in taxes than you legally owe.

But they go one step further, they actually dodge taxes they're meant to legally owe using loopholes.

If GE paid the same proportional taxes as a locally owned sandwich shop I'd be happy.

> That's what they tried to do so GE left the state

This is what happens when states and nations have ridiculous tax laws and rates. People and corporations leave. If anything, we should be advocating CT fix their corporate tax laws, because it's costing them tax revenue.

> dodge taxes they're meant to legally owe using loopholes

That's the law you are describing. These so-called "loopholes" are parts of the tax code specifically inserted to allow people (and corporations) the ability to reduce their annual tax liability. Nobody (and no corporation) does any wrong by using the law to their advantage.

Change the law (remove the loopholes) if it's upsetting. Otherwise, they're doing things the right way.

I was moved by GE's patriotism when they realized they would have to dredge the PCB pollution dumped in the Hudson River -- then promptly lobbied for a retroactive tax cut to fund it.

Well, consider regulatory capture. In such an environment your view is incorrect. I believe we are in such an environment.

> regulatory capture ... I believe we are in such an environment

I think we'll have to disagree on this. I don't see any signs or evidence that Boston politicians are cozying up with GE executives for kick-backs and what-not.

I don't either. I do see evidence of business interests ensuring that the effective tax rate on corporate profits is quite a bit lower than the nominal rate and that this fact will not change regardless of voter preferences.