> It’s by firing people, hiring less, and making less investments in the business all else being equal.

This is farcical. The universal response to higher taxes is to create less revenue? Exactly how does this benefit the CEOs salary? Or improve outcomes for shareholders?

> who will pay out profits as salary to themselves rather than reinvesting the money in the company so as to avoid paying taxes on profits twice

The IRS keeps an eye on this. The business owner does not have unlimited runway and the salary selected must be reasonable. It's also not the only tax vehicle available to the owner to reduce or eliminate the "double taxation" that can occur on profit distributions. There's like half a dozen ways to solve this problem from an ownership perspective.

It should also be noted that the personal income tax rate and the capital gains tax rate are likely to offer very different outcomes for the owner. It's hardly as cut and dry as you project.

> A better solution is to slash corporate taxes and raise income taxes on high earners.

So the corporations engage in practices like buybacks and overfund the business and workers wages end up artificially depressed?

A better solution is to examine the problem and respond with appropriately designed policies that are outcome oriented. These "quick fix" and "slash and burn" policies are _precisely_ how we ended up here. Swinging the pendulum all the way to the other extreme creates the same amount of misery just in a different direction.