101–110 of 350 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see your point about the bad side of capitalism, but consider that this kind of abuse is only possible because the governments allow it. No economic system can live up to its design when corrupt governments interfere with it.
Nice try, but there is not much point in considering the corrupted without also taking a look at who is doing the corrupting.
Don't fault corporations for exploiting legal loopholes to save money... They optimize what they must optimize as operating businesses, and if we the citizens want to compel them to do something we must pass the laws necessary to do so... Stop moralizing the behavior of companies. They aren't humans. If you choose not to buy apple products in reaction to their behavior, great. If you want to convince your friends to…
If you unplugged Apple's board (or given decision-making apparatus) and plugged in a (currently nonexistent) AI with the parameter "Maximize Profit," would you see a different result? I think not. I think we'd see things far more morally horrifying, in fact, with just enough PR makeup to ensure "maximized profit." Unsure why we laud capitalism and then act horrified at the result. Here in America we've made our decis…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Pure free market Capitalism is playing a game of Monopoly where after each time anyone passes go, the player with the most money gets to create a new rule. Guess what? The game is gonna get pretty skewed, pretty darn fast. I think you've misunderstood the free in free market . If anyone is allowed to make rules like that, it is not a free market , not superlatively, not normally, not even slightly. The problem here…
I think their point is that in a free market, the vacuum of power leads to organizations (with the means to) filling that vacuum and establishing rules that rationally favor themselves.
Point of debate: Why should Apple have the US government lay claim to the revenue/profits that it generates in non US countries? From the article: "This allowed Apple to funnel all its sales outside of the Americas - currently about 55% of its revenue - through Irish subsidiaries that were effectively stateless for taxation purposes, and so incurred hardly any tax." If you support the taxation, do you also support th…
So I agree, Apple as an American company should pay taxes on the money it makes abroad. And again, I would vouch for a larger tax break, but still pay on their income abroad - as expats do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[EDIT] My incorrect interpretation of parent comment who means accountability on an individual basis (see children). --- I know where you are coming from but this level of extremely inclusive accountability would result in either: Everyone from the janitors to the legal team being held accountable for corporate tax evasion or: a company wide democracy on every decision that could potentially result in legally or mora…
Why would it be extremely inclusive? The janitor didn't choose to place the money in Ireland. As you go up in management, you typically see pay scale up, and the normal justification for this is that they hold more accountability. You expect more pay to offset the higher risk that a mistake or poor choice will hurt you. If the CFO approves the choice to do X, Y, and Z with the company's money, he should be held accou…
Don't fault corporations for exploiting legal loopholes to save money... They optimize what they must optimize as operating businesses, and if we the citizens want to compel them to do something we must pass the laws necessary to do so... Stop moralizing the behavior of companies. They aren't humans. If you choose not to buy apple products in reaction to their behavior, great. If you want to convince your friends to…
I disagree with this whole heartedly. Laws like this are not deterministic procedures, they are more like best practices. Can you seriously argue that Apple is not a functioning member of society? For many its a daily companion. It should be held accountable to behave like a good citizen within society like everyone else and not find ways to sidestep the law. If society can oust an individual like Weinstein and hold…
This is why we have laws. Expecting people to be 'nice' is naive. They must be coerced.
If you choose not to buy apple products as a result of their behavior, fine. If you want to convince your friends to do the same, fine. But legal repercussions are reserved for law breaking entities. Loophole exploitation is not law breaking.
If you unplugged Apple's board (or given decision-making apparatus) and plugged in a (currently nonexistent) AI with the parameter "Maximize Profit," would you see a different result? I think not. I think we'd see things far more morally horrifying, in fact, with just enough PR makeup to ensure "maximized profit." Unsure why we laud capitalism and then act horrified at the result. Here in America we've made our decis…
If i own a stock that increases 50% this year, am I doing something unethical by not selling it until january so i don’t have to pay taxes on the gain for another year?
That’s equivalent to what Apples doing. It pays all the taxes it owes in every country it does business in. It pays taxes in the US, UK, France, Germany, etc, etc, and what’s left over from the foreign profits it chooses not to bring back to the US, or leave in France, Germany, etc, etc.
Instead it moves those profits to Ireland or the Channel islands so it doesn’t have to pay more taxes on their interest every year while it waits for US corporate tax policy to no longer be so irrational so it can directly return that money to its owners, Apple shareholders.
For instance, in states that allow shooting trespassers, you could buy a patch of sidewalk and shoot anyone that walks into it. I doubt that you would get off scot-free since in criminal law you always consider context.
Why is that notion of context impossible to include in the tax code and leave some interpretability to the judge? This would make these loopholes more risky and therefore less attractive.