|
Quote: Beyond the obvious targeting of Apple, the most profound and harmful effect of this ruling will be on investment and job creation in Europe. Using the Commission’s theory, every company in Ireland and across Europe is suddenly at risk of being subjected to taxes under laws that never existed.
The questions to be answered are (1) is Ireland a sovereign nation or not? (2) if a contract is made with a sovereign nation, can others decide they don't like it and change it? (3) and finally, who'd be stupid enough to set up business anywhere in the EU if anything can happen at any time.
Are these nations or vassal states? If the later, shouldn't they drop their UN membership in favor of a single one representing the all (like the US) ?
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
All of which is evidence of what I was saying in the other thread about that "slogan": gov't is force. The EU is obviously a gov't big enough to take everything you've got and make-up non-existent retroactive "rules" to so justify its actions.
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
And they complained when Erdogan tried to introduce death penalty in a similar way. Maybe EU and Turkey are made for each other after all.
|
|
|
|
|
Anything * the zero I have spent on Apple products is still 0. 
|
|
|
|
|
No one queuing for it in a while
|
|
|
|
|
Many large companies are able to do that and not only in ireland... 
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Ireland enabled the company to pay substantially less
Hardly Apple's fault then, it's the tax authorities not doing their job properly. They know the company is there so why are they not making it pay up?
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, what BS. Apple had smart lawyers, they were looking at ways to avoid paying US taxes, and that money should be in the coffers of the US gov't, and those 6000 people should be US employees. 
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
"Cook described the Commission's decision as "unprecedented," adding that it will have a "profound and harmful effect" on investment and jobs in Europe"
Sure will.
Those 14 milliard in taxes will take care of a lot of salaries for a lot of people, and a lot of contracts for all the infrastructure-y stuff that governments do.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
It is perfectly ok that Irish govmnt has a sole right to agree whatever tax rate for any special company if it is ok for both parties.
What is not ok is that money that Apple's company in Ireland earns, come from all over the European countries (common market) by selling Iphones, Ipads, iTunes, and iWhatever, but all other Europeans, unlike Irishmen, did not agree with Apple to avoid tax payment based on services/product sold on common European market.
Same problem is facing Australia, also with Apple and few others that have legal subsidies operating from Singaphur, but selling to Australian market. Singaphur, even with lower or no tax charges than Australia, at least has the equal tax benefits for all companies settled there, not only Apple.
|
|
|
|
|
Should CP members, at least veterans, vet their rants a bit. www.snopes.com[^] has been around a long while. Most of them know it.
So posting vile/misleading information - is it just that they don't want to lose their comfort food "facts" ? Is it that hard to occasionally fact check claims?
Everyone will blurt out a post on occasion - but when it's regular and continuous fodder, you begin to wonder not only about their sources, but about them.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm.... I recall that a few weeks back I read an article showing that Snopes itself showed bias, but I can't remember what the bias was on. So, going to Snopes is not always a 'definitive source'.
As far as ranting? Many of the posts from 'veterans' show THEIR bias... one way or the other.
Take it for what it's worth... I've largely stopped replying to them in their 'rants' because it is only throwing fuel on the fire.
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Carmichael wrote: I recall that a few weeks back I read an article showing that Snopes itself showed bias, but I can't remember what the bias was on
Maybe even more importantly, where did you read the article. Could it possibly be someone who's lies got called out and thus decides that the one that exposed their lie must be biased?
There's a lot of that, by the way, going on in the US political scene. A real lot.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
There's innuendo there, but that clearly underlines and embraces my original point:
Accuse and Expose are not the same - or - once upon a time they weren't.
The current mentality (do you share it): if one is accused and there is no evidence then it must be a coverup.
If you cannot see the basic stupidity in those accepting that (and millions apparently do with) than I offer you my sympathy.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: if one is accused and there is no evidence because it was covertly destroyed then it must be a coverup.
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
You do see the recursion in your argument, don't you?
Evidence cannot be found so it must have been destroyed.
And if investigators don't find child pornography on you PC - what does that imply about you?
On another topic, you tag-line. At first the give/take government things seems logical. It totally fails to take into account that humans are a communal/gestalt species. Think about this next time you're on a federally built interstate highway.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Of course, except when it was admitted to having been destroyed.
W∴ Balboos wrote: And if investigators don't find child pornography on you PC - what does that imply about you?
Yeah, so when did you stop beating your wife?
W∴ Balboos wrote: tag-line
It is a truism whatever you say. The gov't has nothing except what it takes from the populace.
W∴ Balboos wrote: humans are a communal
True and one in which such community is formed by free choice and free will. Not force. Gov't is force.
W∴ Balboos wrote: federally built interstate highway
Yes, and the gov't can forbid you to travel it anytime they want to.
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote: True and one in which such community is formed by free choice and free will. Not force. Gov't is force.
W∴ Balboos wrote: federally built interstate highway
Yes, and the gov't can forbid you to travel it anytime they want to.
That's one way of viewing a donut, complaining it has a hole in it.
TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote: True and one in which such community is formed by free choice and free will. Not force. Gov't is force.
Why won't I agree with that? Well - consider the following - laws related to peaceful coexistence with your neighbors. What if you don't buy-in; are you exempt?
Or better thought out: without the nasty government getting in the way, it would be basic rule by force, those have the biggest muscles/guns/gangs/etc. telling you what to do. That's actually how the concept of a "King" probably developed. Someone with enough resource to hire thugs got their way - giving them more resource to hire more thugs and the wealthy guy now had effectively an army - and their commands were obeyed or else -> hence, the king was born.
Now wait - this could go along to prove your view, too. What's the difference? Well, that's only cropped up in the last few centuries - where the peasants gathered their money together to hire their own gangs to keep the Kings from telling them what to do. And to put out fires in case someone's house starts to burn.
So - like not wanting to be forced into a community to pay for a fire department. If your place burns it'll take the neighbor's with it. They're now forced to pay for your fire-department costs to protect themselves. Now it's them taking from you.
Basically, it's a full-circle thing. All routes lead to the same butt-hole. It's my belief that the advantage of everyone being "forced" to kick in for the fire protection (police protection, etc.) is that it distributes the burden fairly to all of those who benefit. So - government's taken from everyone - but when you neighbor's place is ablaze, you're glad that the fire department's going to come.
Every option comes with a price - that, I think, we can both agree on. How free should we be to choose our own price? That depends, in the end, on how much your decision will cost me. Slogans just don't make it in a real world with real people and real problems.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: What if you don't buy-in; are you exempt?
No, except by leaving or trying by persuasion to change it.
As for the rest of your treatise: that gov't is best which governs the least as possible. Which, of course, means that the populace is by-and-large a law-abiding and self-governing one, i.e. essentially moral.
As for how kings came about, there's probably something to what you said, but I think it mainly evolved from tribal constructs and because people wanted protection from the strongest guy around from other strong guys. Or something like that.
W∴ Balboos wrote: Slogans
It's not a slogan when it's the truth. Be wary, be very wary.
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote: No, except by leaving or trying by persuasion to change it.
In college, I took a course called "Radical Thought". It sucked. I did learn a few things from it though. One of them was that community persuasion concept. Did you know that's how Communist China did its thing. We, of course, circle back to just who is the community - but immaculately, you're either the community is going to be exploited by the individual or there will be a dictatorship of the people. I believe we all know how well those worked out.
It's that moral part that will get us every time. I would argue that if we recast it as greed we can take it a step further. Consider that greed, in an evolutionary construct, is not a bad thing but a survival instinct. You want your genes to survive. You family; your clan, you tribe, etc. This means that you should, at any cost, get what you need to assure this survival. This is fine in a feral environment where survival is a continuous concern. Roll a head a few million years or so and we have aggregates of people. Greed, now, becomes counter productive to the community. The instinct is still there. It's why communism won't work. It's also why capitalism eventually is anti-capitalistic (no one wants competition). In the latter case, anti-trust laws, for example, help mitigate the trend.
So long as we are humans, we live with a constant contradiction between instincts for survival and the prosperity that's only attainable as a group. That remark on being careful is 100% on the mark. Listen very carefully to what's said. What's not said. And what's going to be done to you for both of these to be accomplished.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
It's a constant balancing act. I think that's the basic genius behind the foundation of the US Constitution. And I wasn't talking about "community persuasion" i.e a top-down approach, I was talking about individual persuasion, i.e. a bottom-up approach.
W∴ Balboos wrote: prosperity that's only attainable as a group
A group of like-minded individuals. Everyone has to be working toward the common goal, but of one's own free choice and free will. You first look out for your own needs and those of your family, then whatever excess you have, you give to others by your own free will and choice, because taking care of others also, over time, takes care of you and because it's the right thing to do. That satisfies both the individual survival imperative and the group survival, group prosperity imperative.
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
I'll be heading home very shortly - just as well as my inbox is overheated.
I think the main thing we differ on is (not perfectly put!) the initialization of the community projects. You have more faith in human nature than I.
Euphemistically, they won't even stop at a stop sign unless a cop is watching. Not all - but more than enough. The miserable predators that took advantage of us and countless other Sandy victims and, by contrast, those who came and gave of themselves freely, which I will also never forget.
But the former of these two will spoil it for all the rest if given free choice - because that's what they do.
By the way - a good part of the thread - real thought - what I was hoping for in the original topic, but this will do.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Of course, I was being idealistic. I think in the end, eventually, that's where things have to end up or we get a reset.
Have a good evening/day, etc...
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
