I don't think it's the same thing, because your salary is an expense to the company, so they don't pay taxes on that amount. (Some states/cities do tax corporate revenue as well as corporate profit, but not federal taxes.)
I'm not saying they are taxed on the amount of money they pay you. Well, there is Social Security (US) taxes that they pay but you could argue that's money that should go to the employee anyway if there was no such tax. I'm saying the company makes money that is taxed and then they pay you out of that money in which you are taxed for receiving.
Ok, granted, not all the money that the company has on hand that is paid into your salary is taxed as corporate income, but the idea is valid. I agree not at the same level as taxing profits and then taxing dividends which is essentially the same money.
I'm just going with the notion that it is not uncommon for money to be taxed as it is exchanged from one entity to another.
"Most people are taxed roughly 36% (28% income tax, 2% medicare, 6% social security) on their labor, however investments are only taxed at a flat 15%."
"Double taxation" may not be an entirely accurate label (more like "an additional pass of taxation"), but the fact that dividends (in particular) are taxed as corporate profit before being taxed as individual profit makes that 15% figure misleading for dividends, which is what the child comment brought up: "Arguably, you get double-taxed if you own stocks."
Really, the number of times the money is taxed is irrelevant (except wrt paperwork) and we should be looking at the total tax level, but the point is that it's more than the nominal tax rate on qualified dividends if we're going to be comparing tax rate on labor income to tax rate on non-labor income, apples to apples.
Of course, that's specifically for dividends; bond premium payments and capital gains are a different discussion.
