Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google to Invest $10B in India

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 349 posts

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#151

Post by linuxftw »

itronitron wrote: post #140
linuxftw wrote: post #136

More corporate imperialism. This will only further the wealth gap between domestic companies and companies owned/backed by google. Is there an Indian-owned search engine? Displaced. Indian-owned news aggregator? Displaced. Nothing more than the modern day process of creating a banana republic. Rich foreigners with massive amounts of capital can dominate the local business climate, strong lobbying will cement their do…

whereas in the US it's just rich citizens with massive amounts of capital dominating the local business climate

Cheap overseas labor subsidizes the rich here. The political class has crushed small business by allowing large corporations to outsource their pollution and side-step labor and safety laws.

If you want giant international corporations to run the world, this is the way.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#153

Post by wenc »

poiuytrewqa wrote: post #67
flippedbit wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tax minimization is a form of tax avoidance rather than tax evasion (Not saying it’s good, rather just that google weren’t breaking any laws).

There's no such a tax avoidance rule that is allowed and tax evasion is not. Also avoid and evade are similar term. Avoid > keep away from or stop oneself from doing Evade > escape or avoid (someone or something), especially by guile or trickery. This is the reason why many US tech companies got fined in Europe (Apple and Google are one of them) P.S. can someone explain why I get down votes for something factual? Thi…

> Also avoid and evade are similar term. > P.S. can someone explain why I get down votes for something factual? This forum is ridiculous at times

"Tax avoidance" and "tax evasion" are technical terms in accounting with very specific definitions and entailments, and the difference isn't just in the English words. Most accounting textbooks and courses cover this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_avoidance

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_evasion

Even in Europe, this technical difference is recognized, but with one catch: the EU has enacted a counter-avoidance directive (ATAD, Jan 2019) - evasion is always illegal. This is not the case in most places around the world.

Infographic:

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/economy/201...

Fiscal vocabulary:

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/economy/201...

Finally, the HN guidelines provide good tips on how comment productively. (see the In Comments section) This helps us learn from each other's experiences.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#154

Post by divs1210 »

kranner wrote: post #133
enitihas wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much more easier to control than China. Ambani doesn't have an "Ambani liberation army" backing him up. Think of it this way, why did China spin off Ant Financial out of Alibaba? Had it been in hands of foreign investors, it would be a huge issue later on if it became big. And if it became big, it would be much harder to spin it off that way. You can't spin off 100 billions and not expect strong retaliation from the…

OK, thanks for explaining your point. I still think you're conflating Tencent with China as much as you're overestimating how well-functioning the Indian government is. In my view it is grossly incompetent beyond spreading propaganda, horse-trading MPs and MLAs to swing elections, and indeed disappearing people and killing them extra-judiciously in fake encounters. Ambani capturing everything would result in the comp…

We made the mistake of not conflating East India Company with Britain, and it didn't end well for us.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#155

Post by Barrin92 »

tlear wrote: post #141
Barrin92 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Getting the feeling China has blown it and successful companies looking to expand into Asia are now looking at India instead Chinese leadership priced this in years ago. If you follow ongoing political debates in China more closely they were already talking about the next 20 years being rocky as China climbs up in the world stage five to ten years ago. Why do you think China's Made in China 2025 industrial policy pr…

Talk is talk, but question is why murder Indian soldiers? Why bother destroying the golden goose Honkong? Add to that silly power games to try and intimidate Australia(and failing) PRC strategy is very far from smart here. Perhaps it is supreme arrogance? Arrogance like that historically have led to a lot of people getting killed.

Hong Kong isn't a golden goose any more. Hong Kong went from representing about a fifth of the Chinese economy to about 2% today. The Shanghai stock exchange today is larger than the one in Hong Kong, and the perception in China has shifted from seeing it as an important economic region to a political nuissance as the role of foreign capital diminishes. It's not seen as a dynamic region any more and the tech talent goes to Shenzhen or the Greater Bay Area and to mainland universities while HK suffers from stagnation, so basically they've decided that now is the time to incorporate it before the situation becomes politically untenable.

The situation with India is more complicated and there's actually no consensus inside the party. The arguments for the more assertive stance are mainly that there's right now a huge asymmetry between China and India, simply put India doesn't stand a chance in an actual conflict. The hawkish factions inside the party argue that conflict is inevitable so now is the time to clarify matters as long as China has a tactical advantage.

The jury's actually out on whether that's a smart move or not. From the perspective of the Chinese there's certainly a case to be made for it as the US is in political disarray under incompetent leadership.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#156

Post by kranner »

divs1210 wrote: post #154
kranner wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, thanks for explaining your point. I still think you're conflating Tencent with China as much as you're overestimating how well-functioning the Indian government is. In my view it is grossly incompetent beyond spreading propaganda, horse-trading MPs and MLAs to swing elections, and indeed disappearing people and killing them extra-judiciously in fake encounters. Ambani capturing everything would result in the comp…

We made the mistake of not conflating East India Company with Britain, and it didn't end well for us.

Who was the us in that scenario? There was no India back then, just a set of kingdoms and 'princely states' that hated each other as much as they opposed any European takeover. The present circumstances are in no way similar.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#157

Post by MangoCoffee »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #68
seemslegit wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China hasn't "blown" anything - it is set to compete with US head to head on the world stage not with India over US investments.

Not sure why you are being downvoted. China is clearly the one investing in foreign countries now, for instance see belt & road initiative. It is also clearly conpeting with US, with Trump administration exacerbating the conflict. Even if you don't like China, you should not pretend they are a in a weaker position than they are.

you should check one-belt-one-road again. it haven't bring any fruits that China is hoping for.

China is aging. while India have plenty of young cheap labors. its only natural for companies want India's labors and market.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#158

Post by MangoCoffee »

China is aging.

China population https://www.populationpyramid.net/china/2020/

vs

India population https://www.populationpyramid.net/india/2020/

China will never develop a consumption based economy with its aging population. It takes Europe, decades for its population to age. It only take Japan 25 years to age like Europe and China's one child policy is not helping and its on track to age like Japan.

It's only a logical decision to go to India for its young population and most Indian speak English. If only India is more friendly to foreign business and can do what CCP did. (central planning) I think India can surpass China to became number two largest economy.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#159

Post by sukilot »

kamaal wrote: post #70
ankit219 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a cause for alarm, and some Indians do see that as a threat. Right now, Indian society is caught in a deep web of fake news, false narratives, and the conflating of what the govt is, what the nation is, and the difference between the two. Many competitors have raised a lot of questions about how Jio did not follow the rules (there are a lot to link) the basic one being a rule about giving free plans for more…

Most Indians care only about the cheapest workable plan, product, service, while making a purchase. It's not about Jio, it's about the 500 rupees free call, free SMS, free 4G plans. As long as Jio offers it they'll use it. They'll drop it as soon as something cheaper comes around. Mukesh Amabani, is mostly raising money because he had simply too much debt, and he is also getting old. It could also be a part of larger…

If the children don't even want to bother contributing to the enterprise, why not give ownership to the larger public, via a stock sale + charitable donation (like Gates and Buffet do), ?

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#160

Post by enitihas »

kranner wrote: post #133
enitihas wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much more easier to control than China. Ambani doesn't have an "Ambani liberation army" backing him up. Think of it this way, why did China spin off Ant Financial out of Alibaba? Had it been in hands of foreign investors, it would be a huge issue later on if it became big. And if it became big, it would be much harder to spin it off that way. You can't spin off 100 billions and not expect strong retaliation from the…

OK, thanks for explaining your point. I still think you're conflating Tencent with China as much as you're overestimating how well-functioning the Indian government is. In my view it is grossly incompetent beyond spreading propaganda, horse-trading MPs and MLAs to swing elections, and indeed disappearing people and killing them extra-judiciously in fake encounters. Ambani capturing everything would result in the comp…

I think you are trying to argue both sides here. If the government is not afraid of doing shady stuff, like the Chinese government, then it is free to do anything to any billionaire, and being rich doesn't get anyone any power, like China.

If the government respects the rule of law, and doesn't do any extra judicial stuff, even then it makes sense to not let a competing foreign power like China be a stakeholder in your important companies.

Post reply on HN