Indeed, there’s nothing illogical about adjusting tax rates and structures as things change.

I am deeply sceptical of the idea that 99% of us are suddenly going to be idle any day now, so I think endless think pieces on what we should do when that day arrives are kind of pointless. But it is certainly obvious that if it did happen, we would have to reassess how we do stuff.

This is utterly backwards and your false statement leads to a completely wrong set of inferences.

We don't let corporations do anything because they provide value through jobs and taxes. What company do you know that exists (beyond transiently) solely by paying taxes and employing people?

Companies are an extension of the individual, they exist to make money for the individuals that own them so that those individuals can acquire goods and services that they themselves need or desire.

How do companies make this money? Holding people at gun point and taking it is generally illegal; instead they resort to providing goods or services to some set of people who are willing to pay for them.

To provide these goods or services they need to employ people. The fewer people companies in aggregate can employ, the better for people in aggregate since those people can acquire "things" (food, jewellery, phones,...) for less of their own labour (or equivalent dollars).

If the "benefits dry up" as you say, people will stop sending their hard earned money to this company and the company will eventually cease to exist. Your fallacy was assuming the benefits were the jobs and taxes, not the goods and services provided.

Corporations don’t provide goods or services: people inside them do. Corporations are a legal structure we allow to exist because it enables jobs and taxes.

Corporations don’t have to exist; they are a creation of society and thus can - and I think obviously- should be changed

Have you ever done anything together with a group of other people? That is a company. That's why they are called companies. They are a group of people doing things.

That has existed for millions of years already. First as hunting companies, then as raiding companies. It exists in other species as well. It will never go away. It has existed in every human society, no matter what political or economical ideology.

The real question is how companies should be organized and owned.

If you conflate corporations with any grouping of people, then they're the same as cartels, gangs, feudal kingdoms...

Clearly we're talking about a specific modern legal entity with a specific organization that, as you say, can change.

Okay, ban the corporation as a legal entity. And all other companies as legal entity so that they don't become an escape hatch.

It will not take longer than until sunrise next morning before all those corporations are now different single individuals who contract their whole company structure again and now have everything from job contracts to investor contracts in their own names instead, using probably the same kind of complicated contracts that preceded the modern corporation as a legal entity. What did you benefit?

Not even remotely true; corporations as we would recognise them today pre-date the legal system as we would recognise it today (and have existed in just about every legal system since).

Certain configurations of the corporation are described in our laws, e.g. "limited liability".

Allow to exist and creation are completely different.

Wolves predate towns but we choose to not allow them in towns.

Nothing you said is really in contradiction with what I said, you're just looking at the why from an individual standpoint.

All of what you said can be true and also others can and do decide to allow or disallow a group to exist.

Thank you, took the words out my mouth.