91–100 of 180 posts
The chart showing the number of employees per state is comically misleading. They have tens of thousands of employees in Cupertino, but make the largest bucket represent "1000+" to make it appear employees are more evenly distributed across the country.
Not that it makes the chart any less misleading but Apple Retail is the biggest division by number and those employees are indeed spread out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I saw this video about LA a few days ago and it is very sad how these tax incentives are ruining entire states. [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWTic9btP38
If one state didn't offer a tax break, then another would and win the business. There are 50 states, and most of them compete for businesses with tax incentives fairly competitively.
It is possible that the bribe-for-tax-breaks exchange actually provides benefit for the community, but that's not necessary for the transaction to take place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like people, states might decide to form a union to increase prosperity for their citizens by bargaining with corporations as a collective. It makes it more difficult for adversaries to overpower individual states in a union. This could consist of an obligation to uphold revenue (taxes) which is used to provide certain living standards (e.g. medical expenses, feeding grandma, etc...) through a social guarantee. How d…
But that would give up states rights - and it doesn't stop bullying by central government to place offices in "for the governing party" desirable areas. Why do you think BT has a big engineering presence in all 4 parts of the UK? or why the BBC was forced to move to Manchester
When states unite and cooperate they are exercising their right to self assemble or self association. Often individual states exercise this right after chronically being picked apart by a powerful adversary and find they don't want to leave behind the benefits the union provides.
I don't know enough about specifics in the UK to answer your questions. Union members typically vote on the direction of the union or leadership positions and so these members are responsible for their decisions or leadership.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tech giants can't go just anywhere. They need to locate their offices in cities which have large, highly educated, tech savvy workforces (or at least the infrastructure to relocate, satisfy and sustain those workforces). This acts as a check on just how much of a tax break a municipality is able to give them, as public funds are needed to support that infrastructure. Austin, Seattle and Culver City seem to be strikin…
>This acts as a check on just how much of a tax break a municipality is able to give them, as public funds are needed to support that infrastructure. Well I suppose its Apple, so when they do cronyism, it must be okay. /s
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they are adding people to your community- what roads will these new people be driving on? What schools will their children be attending? The additional revenue is not being added in a vacuum.
Aren't roads funded from gas tax? And schools are almost entirely paid by the local property taxes, at least in the communities where most of Apple employees will live.
So - any idea just where they’ll KUT the expansion? The domain is too far away, right?
The local article I read says "It will be less than a mile from existing Apple facilities" [1] which I assume means the Parmer [2] location. [1]: https://spectrumlocalnews.com/tx/austin/news/2018/12/13/appl... [2]: https://www.google.com/maps/search/Corporate+Campus/@30.4347...
http://www.kut.org/post/apple-says-its-building-new-1-billio...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they are adding people to your community- what roads will these new people be driving on? What schools will their children be attending? The additional revenue is not being added in a vacuum.
Aren't roads funded from gas tax? And schools are almost entirely paid by the local property taxes, at least in the communities where most of Apple employees will live.
Curious how much of this is “natural”, how much is forced by stupid CA policies and COL, and how much is “spread out jobs and investment to reduce government risk/gain government support at state and federal-legislative levels.”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they are adding people to your community- what roads will these new people be driving on? What schools will their children be attending? The additional revenue is not being added in a vacuum.
The new people will be paying sales taxes, property taxes and state income taxes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>"Taking less money from someone who is building a business in your area is not a cost" Let's look at what that someone will be expecting of your area - working roads, a fire department, a police department, public transportation, a school system, a library, a park, emergency services. How is an influx of of potentially much more people consuming those services not a cost?
That certainly is a cost. But it's not what the parent poster was saying... I'll bet the costs you speak of are covered by income taxes and the corporate tax, with a little leftover per employee (so - a large pot of extra money at the end of the day).