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

Apple and Google embody two alternative models of capitalism

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 122 posts

Re: Apple and Google embody two alternative models of capitalism

#81

Post by alasdair_ »

BeenThere888 wrote: post #18
eldavido wrote: post #11

There is so much wrong with this article I hardly know where to begin. First, it presumes a 19th-century separation of "capital" and "labor" where "capital" is a bunch of greedy pigs trying their damndest to exploit labor, with little crossover between the two groups. The modern reality is way more complicated. Almost every member of "labor" has some form of pension, 401(k), IRA, or personal stock holding, and even i…

Why should the poor give a damn about the stock market, though? Every time a bubble pops, they're the one's left holding the tab. How many of those 401ks and IRAs were wiped out and the "owner" left with nothing after Madoff, housing bubble, etc. IMO, it's a fools errand as a figurative little person on the totem pole to babysit the wealth of the rich who leave them dangling in front of the fan that just had shit spl…

>How many of those 401ks and IRAs were wiped out and the "owner" left with nothing after Madoff, housing bubble, etc.

I assume almost none of them.

People with most of their wealth in a 401k probably didn't have a lot of money in Madoff's hedge fund and the housing bubble also likely didn't wipe out retirement funds for the people that just left their retirement alone.

Re: Apple and Google embody two alternative models of capitalism

#82

Post by scarface74 »

Retric wrote: post #37
eldavido wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For my money I would much, much rather own shares of stock in my retirement plan than have a state- or corporate-backed pension. Have you seen the movie Casino? That actually happened, the Teamsters pension fund came under control of the mob. What about Illinois, which is facing a $120 billion pension shortfall due to decades of accounting gimmicks? What about the UAW guys, who were counting on pensions from the big…

And I vastly prefer the reverse. Pensions avoid the classic hopping you die before you run out of money. Further, money enough to cover the basics is vastly more important than 'extra'.

You can buy an immediate annuity that has guaranteed income until you die with different options:

A) guaranteed life

B) guaranteed life of you or your spouse

C) guaranteed life with a return of the unused amount

D) guaranteed life with a guaranteed x year certain

Of course the different options you choose affect your monthly payout.

Re: Apple and Google embody two alternative models of capitalism

#83

Post by azernik »

krick wrote: post #46
skywhopper wrote: post #40

I'm disappointed that two other large pieces of the economic puzzle are left out: workers and government. Corporations have more cash than they know what to do with? That means that 1) wages are too low, and 2) taxes are too low. More specific to Apple's case, the hoarding of cash overseas to avoid paying US taxes on it is one of many poisonous symptoms of our international capitalism. The amount of tax Apple would p…

I guess this may be not popular opinion here, but I don't see anything wrong with legally avoiding taxes. It might be wrong that the whole system is convoluted enough that this would be very hard for your average honest citizen, but easy enough for resourceful corporation, if anything. But avoiding taxes seems only logical, if you think you can manage and allocate resources better than your government. And rest assur…

Forget "wrong". It is a dysfunctional way for the system to be set up.

Re: Apple and Google embody two alternative models of capitalism

#84

Post by bkohlmann »

vilmosi wrote: post #80
krick wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess this may be not popular opinion here, but I don't see anything wrong with legally avoiding taxes. It might be wrong that the whole system is convoluted enough that this would be very hard for your average honest citizen, but easy enough for resourceful corporation, if anything. But avoiding taxes seems only logical, if you think you can manage and allocate resources better than your government. And rest assur…

> I guess this may be not popular opinion here, but I don't see anything wrong with legally avoiding taxes The problem is that you can legally avoid taxes. Are we so used to this concept that we don't see its own hypocrisy?

"Legally avoiding taxes" simply means you are using the law, as written and passed via our Constitutionally mandated legislative process, to minimize your tax burden. The simple fix to this is for the tax code to change to prohibit whatever is currently being done. It's not hypocritical to follow the tax code as written.

Re: Apple and Google embody two alternative models of capitalism

#85

Post by bkohlmann »

gaius wrote: post #76

Neither pay their taxes

If they are violating the law, they will be sued by the government and forced to pay what they owe just as any tax payer who violates the law. As it stands, they are paying what taxes they owe as allowed by our existing tax code. Out of curiosity, what, in your estimation, is the legal amount they have failed to remit?

Re: Apple and Google embody two alternative models of capitalism

#86

Post by taneq »

dv_dt wrote: post #41
Retric wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I vastly prefer the reverse. Pensions avoid the classic hopping you die before you run out of money. Further, money enough to cover the basics is vastly more important than 'extra'.

Pensions aren't portable - in the modern labor market where people are expected to have multiple emplyers and possibly even career arcs, that's a pretty limiting. Personally, I feel that too many pensions plans (private and state) are at financial risk and have seen too many companies go under (wiping out pensions), or severely cut back (changing their payouts and coverage). Really, I'd prefer something more portable…

That's why pensions should be provided by the government, as one of the things paid for by all those taxes you paid over the years.

Which is why I get really mad when the current Australian government tries to spin it that retirees are 'bludgers' and are a drain on the system when they draw their (paltry) pensions. No, these people paid 40 years' worth of taxes to the government, and being supported by the government after they retired was part of that deal.

You can't offer to pay me tomorrow for a hamburger today, and then when I ask for my money tomorrow, call me a beggar.

Re: Apple and Google embody two alternative models of capitalism

#87

Post by rebootthesystem »

mwfunk wrote: post #74
rebootthesystem wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there is no legal (or historical) basis for the idea that maximizing shareholder value is the primary concern of a corporation Please folks, stop posting comments if you don't have the slightest concept of how businesses work. OK, let me demonstrate how flawed this is by using a hypothetical scenario. A friend of yours has an idea for a business. She goes to you and two other friends. She needs $300K to launch the…

There's a pretty wide range of corporate behavior that lie in between "maximize shareholder value" taking priority over all other considerations, and shareholders getting ripped off by the company they invested in. There are more than two mutually exclusive options for how a company should prioritize its resources.

A company isn't a charity. It's a business. It's there to make money. It does this by delivering a product that solves a problem for someone (or another business) and, by means of the value it offers, it can generate revenue and a profit. If a company has investors, those investors are there because they want to make money with the business activity they funded. Plain and simple.

So, a business is there to solve a problem for it's customers while making money for shareholders. All ends of that equation derive the desired benefits. A company MUST focus on shareholder value. And the way to do that is to solve real problems and do so as well as possible and as efficiently as possible.

These things are interrelated. Based on the down-votes it is obvious some have missed the point of my prior comment's hypothetical about the three friends funding a business.

These three shareholders are jumping on the deal because they want to make money. Even our beloved YC jumps on deals to make money. That's what business is about. It isn't a bad word. And, yes, there's nothing wrong with shareholder value being a priority because the ONLY real and sustainable way to increase shareholder value is to ALSO increase CUSTOMER VALUE. One feeds the other.

Have a crappy product and there is no long terms sustainable way to increase shareholder value. Have an excellent product that solves a real problem as well as excellent customer support, marketing, pricing, etc. and shareholder value WILL increase.

You actually WANT a company you invest in to maximize shareholder value.

Re: Apple and Google embody two alternative models of capitalism

#88

Post by urda »

gaius wrote: post #76

Neither pay their taxes

They absolutely pay their taxes. They have a duty to their shareholders to not only pay said taxes, but the exact amount in taxes.

Do you seriously expect them to pay more in taxes beyond what is legally required of them? Please avoid these "low effort" comments here on Hacker News, they do not work here.

Re: Apple and Google embody two alternative models of capitalism

#89

Post by zimzam »

skywhopper wrote: post #40

I'm disappointed that two other large pieces of the economic puzzle are left out: workers and government. Corporations have more cash than they know what to do with? That means that 1) wages are too low, and 2) taxes are too low. More specific to Apple's case, the hoarding of cash overseas to avoid paying US taxes on it is one of many poisonous symptoms of our international capitalism. The amount of tax Apple would p…

Why should Apple pay any taxes to the US government for things it sells overseas? They already paid (or in this case, avoided) EU taxes on the sales in EU countries. If we're arguing about 'fairness', the EU should be getting approximately all of the taxes the Irish subsidiary allows Apple to avoid.

Double-taxing exports (1x from the US government, 1x from the country they are sold in) is a really bizarre policy, especially in this era of global trade.

Post reply on HN