151–160 of 168 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow you're either a Google employee or huge fanboy. Every single one of your comments is pro-google/anti-apple.
I thought you were kidding but 3 pages in and not a single one outside those 2 topics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So send a check to the Treasury. Nobody is stopping you. You could even organize a bunch of like minded people to send checks to the Treasury. I needed the tax cut. If you don’t, you don’t have to keep it. I am a better steward of my money than the government, especially when it comes to saving and investing for my family’s future.
If you needed the tax cut, you likely didn't get much of a tax cut.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes if you don't have any support staff it is easier to reach such numbers.
This is on purpose. If the number of support people is a linear function of the number of users, the business cannot grow past half the worlds population.
Many other companies that have more customers than Alphabet manage to have support staff. While I doubt Alphabet cares, I won't use one of their paid services until I can get support.
Their efficiency is impressive. On an annualized basis, they are doing ~$120B. They have ~85k employees. That means they are generating ~1.5M Revenue Per Employee. That's crazy
If anyone is curious about what companies in the S&P 500 rank higher in the revenue per employee metric: https://craft.co/reports/s-p-500-revenue-per-employee-perspe...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OP might be exaggerating, but they are not talking about who lobbies, they are talking about the politicians who pass the bills and implement the tax cuts. In that they are right. In the house, 191 democrats voted against the tax overhaul, 0 voted for it. 227 republicans voted for it, 12 against it [0]. The senate was much the same [1]. You can say what you want, but this is a republican tax bill no matter who it ben…
Benefits the rich? You mean it benefits everyone. I'm not rich and my taxes went down.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Usually companies grow at a slower rate as they get larger. Alphabet's growth rate is actually accelerating. And they're not acquiring this growth, they're generating it organically. Truly astounding.
It's been said that they created the first self-replicating talent machine. Having worked with them, I believe it.
How does a company like Alphabet have so much space to grow at this point?
That's not the only thing, but it's a big part of it.
Their efficiency is impressive. On an annualized basis, they are doing ~$120B. They have ~85k employees. That means they are generating ~1.5M Revenue Per Employee. That's crazy
Usually, when a business is as lucrative as google's, competition arrives. But it seems like tech doesn't work that way.
For example, if a chicken restaurant is making $1.5 million in revenue per employee, then you'd see tons of chicken restaurants pop up to compete. Even the employees, seeing such extraordinary revenue, would quit and open up shop. But for a variety of reasons, tech doesn't seem to work that way.
Is it lack of capital? Lack of opportunities? Lack of tech-oriented people? Lack of entrepreneurs?
> That's crazy
It's ridiculous. It's amazing how profitable large tech companies are. What's even more puzzling is why there aren't more googles/facebooks/etc, especially in other countries like france, germany, britain, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd start by revisiting the assumption that individual and corporate tax rates should be similar, or even comparable.
Why shouldn't they be similar? Seems reasonable that a "legal person" should be subject to similar taxes as a real person. And from a fairness standpoint, it doesn't seem fair that Google is taxed 11% on $billions of income after expenses while I get taxed 25% on $thousands of income sort-of-before expenses. Fairness is not always best for society, but it does seem like a reasonable default. In my mind, the default i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought you were kidding but 3 pages in and not a single one outside those 2 topics.
I thought you were exaggerating but this guy is the closest thing to what people call "shill" that I have ever seen on HN.