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

251–260 of 349 posts

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#251

Post by achow »

Nature of these investments seems to be somewhat different. These investment are more towards infrastructure, rural skilling, education etc.

There were couple of ministers who were part of the announcement (unlike other corporate investment announcement like that of recent FB one, where govt officials would never make an appearance); one of the ministers even extorted Google to adopt cluster of villages and make them 'Digital' ones.

https://youtu.be/GwJJw2fE8T4?t=1625

This $10 Billion (!) investment is not in the same league as that of FB, Intel, Saudi investment in Reliance Jio.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#252

Post by enitihas »

asenna wrote: post #250
intended wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, yet recently I recall prices being raised and all firms moving in lock step. A classic signs of oligopolistic behavior. Further all 3 major firms are in massive debt, and after the SC interpretation of how they have to pay their dues, they are pretty much dead firms unless they get money. You can already see them creating new packages to target users who have more disposable income. I'd say make hay while the s…

I don't think Jio's game is to squeeze out revenue from the cheap data users. They've openly admitted to using Deep-packet Inspection techniques and I believe data harvesting is where the main long-term game looks to be for them. If you're concerned about your privacy, it's usually known in India in the tech circles to stay away from Jio related products. https://in.reuters.com/article/reliance-telecoms-jio/from-bi..…

What can any packet inspection do over https, since that's where the majority of the important traffic is,not to mention that a lot of apps use certificate pinning, so even MITM can't help analyse the packets. And all this is before eSNI becomes mainstream.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#253

Post by colinmhayes »

paulpan wrote: post #242
screye wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Mukhesh Ambani who's got a good connect with the current ruling Government To be fair, Mukesh has got good connections everywhere. He is India's most powerful person. Amitabh and the Shahrukh (some of the world's richest actors, both half billionaires) both volunteered as servers at his daughters wedding as a show of appreciation. If a man can command the most powerful of his country to such level of willful subser…

I'm not familiar with Mukhesh Ambani or his reputation, but sounds like he's India's version of China's Jack Ma? Jack Ma and Alibaba came to the forefront due in part to his connections to the Chinese government. On the topic itself, it's unclear what Google's intentions are and how they could benefit from such an investment. $10B is not a big sum so is the purpose altruistic or as grease for other purposes?

Companies aren't altruistic, their only purpose is to provide value to shareholders. That doesn't mean this is a greasing, it could just be google wanting more people connected to the internet so more people use their products.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#254

Post by mav3rick »

paulpan wrote: post #242
screye wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Mukhesh Ambani who's got a good connect with the current ruling Government To be fair, Mukesh has got good connections everywhere. He is India's most powerful person. Amitabh and the Shahrukh (some of the world's richest actors, both half billionaires) both volunteered as servers at his daughters wedding as a show of appreciation. If a man can command the most powerful of his country to such level of willful subser…

I'm not familiar with Mukhesh Ambani or his reputation, but sounds like he's India's version of China's Jack Ma? Jack Ma and Alibaba came to the forefront due in part to his connections to the Chinese government. On the topic itself, it's unclear what Google's intentions are and how they could benefit from such an investment. $10B is not a big sum so is the purpose altruistic or as grease for other purposes?

Unlike Jack, Mukesh's father started with Reliance Polyester then expanded the business. Mukesh took it to even greater heights.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#255

Post by shadykiller »

paulpan wrote: post #242
screye wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Mukhesh Ambani who's got a good connect with the current ruling Government To be fair, Mukesh has got good connections everywhere. He is India's most powerful person. Amitabh and the Shahrukh (some of the world's richest actors, both half billionaires) both volunteered as servers at his daughters wedding as a show of appreciation. If a man can command the most powerful of his country to such level of willful subser…

I'm not familiar with Mukhesh Ambani or his reputation, but sounds like he's India's version of China's Jack Ma? Jack Ma and Alibaba came to the forefront due in part to his connections to the Chinese government. On the topic itself, it's unclear what Google's intentions are and how they could benefit from such an investment. $10B is not a big sum so is the purpose altruistic or as grease for other purposes?

I wouldn't call Mukhesh Ambani as Jack Ma. He inherited a lot of wealth and more important, a lot of government connections. He can bend rules for e.g. his non-existent Jio University got the tag "Institution of Eminence"

He gets foreign technology and just jumps in any sector with governments blessing. Be it oil and gas, infra projects or even telecom

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#257

Post by OJFord »

izacus wrote: post #194
OJFord wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I suppose you voluntarily pay more tax than you need to?

"He" is not a for-profit corporation, but a human person. Corporations aren't people no matter how much dollars go into PR efforts to tell people otherwise. As such, them not paying their part to the society is damaging no matter how many personal appeals you do. Please stop humanizing corporations to make them get away with not paying their part.

I'm not humanising corporations, I hate it when they make matey communications and kick myself if I catch myself referring to a (singular) company as 'they'.

But the terms avoidance and evasion are the same for corporate taxation as they are for personal tax. The desire to not pay more than necessary is also the same, and that seems entirely rational.

If you want a company to pay more tax (and it's not presently breaking laws - not evading tax) then you should want legislation to change. 'Company X should donate to the my country's treasury' (pay more tax than it needs to, not avoid it) is not a compelling argument for my (fictional) company any more than it is for my personal liability.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#259

Post by coryfklein »

Jweb_Guru wrote: post #137
OJFord wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No tax evasion is ever permitted, by definition. (Tax owed and not paid.) Finding ways to reduce tax liability (rational) is called tax avoidance . (Tax not owed, and obviously not paid.)

The idea that corporations can avoid paying taxes anywhere and this is just "good accounting" is stupid on the face of it, regardless of the terminology used.

Just to make it clear, the "stupid" thing here is the tax law, not the behavior of the corporations.

It would be "stupid" to expect corporations to pay more taxes than they are legally required to.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#260

Post by patrickaljord »

OJFord wrote: post #128
kjaftaedi wrote: post #10

Google has been funneling around 20 billion dollars yearly through Bermuda to evade taxes using the infamous 'irish double sandwich'. Pressure from the US and EU is finally forcing Ireland to change their laws. Google is in a situation when they have money that they need to figure out a plan for since they can't do as much tax evasion as they previously were permitted to. https://www.caymancompass.com/2020/01/02/goog…

No tax evasion is ever permitted, by definition. (Tax owed and not paid.) Finding ways to reduce tax liability (rational) is called tax avoidance . (Tax not owed, and obviously not paid.)

In France and many other EU country, tax avoidance is illegal.
Post reply on HN