• Google boss "very proud of our tax avoidance scheme"
    234 replies, posted
[QUOTE=garry;38819353]My attitude has nothing to do with having lots of money, about working for your money. Almost everyone with a job who pays tax feels the same. I'm sure it's a miserable experience in the US and people can't wait to get a job - but it's a HUGE problem in the UK. [B]People debate whether to get a job or not because they will actually end up with LESS money[/B].[/QUOTE] You sound like every blue collar American I know. Let me guess, when you get benifits its great. But when the poor get benefits, its horrible.
Would probably do the same to be honest.
I don't see what the big deal is, they're just saying what everybody knows they're thinking, it's the same thing every large company is thinking. If you need to be mad at something, be mad at the government for allowing these loopholes to exist.
I see, pulling an Ayn Rand here.
From what i've read, this thread boils down to two arguments. The first being if a corporation should feel obligated to pay extra taxes to governments. I can see why people would expect them to, they make obscene amounts of money each year and by eluding taxes they are essentially scamming the country and causing the rest of the tax payers to fill the gap. However from google's perspective they are simply attempting to be more profitable by cutting down on expenses, it's nothing personal, that just how corporations work. They don't have morals, they simply want to keep their stockholders happy (and quite possibly wealthy) and their company expanding. Google actually differs from this slightly by giving so much money to charities, though you could argue that that is for PR and directly benefits them. So why would they pay money than they have to with little to no benefit (again possibly PR, but it would probably look better to use the money to build a children's hospital in Peru or some other shit)? Get your gov't to change the damn tax code, if its so messed up that a multi-billion-dollar corporation can pay no taxes there is a pretty serious issue The second argument pertains to taxes against individuals, and i don't even want to touch that shit. It's not worth arguing over.
[QUOTE=Lazor;38819299]corporations set the rules of the game so this statement is ultimately meaningless[/QUOTE] Not at all. That is only another "move" made in the "game". The fact that corporations even have any influence is the problem. How could you blame them for wanting to pay lower taxes?
[QUOTE=King Tiger;38822192]Not at all. That is only another "move" made in the "game". The fact that corporations even have any influence is the problem. How could you blame them for wanting to pay lower taxes?[/QUOTE] this post is very confusing
[QUOTE=Kopimi;38822290]this post is very confusing[/QUOTE] Forget the stupid game thing/joke. I'm replying to Lazor saying that the real crime is that corporations even have influence in the government.
[QUOTE=garry;38817881]Seems like a recession is a perfect time for a business to reduce the amount of tax it pays?[/QUOTE] The voice of reason in this thread.
I'm sorry, but as someone who works a semi-shitty minimum wage job (that gets 15% of my paycheck taken out in taxes) to help support my family, and who grew up in a poor rural area to a single mother with no child support or welfare, I can safely say that you can go fuck yourself if you honestly are supporting these monolithic wealth-stealing, hoarding assholes in their castles on the hilltops continuing to exploit the shitty broken system to avoid paying just the fraction of what they should be paying for society. Is a huge welfare system a good thing? Not unless you have the social support with it (i.e. Denmark, Sweden, Norway). But when it's these same assholes hoarding their wealth, constricting their oh-so-glorified jobs, and refusing to raise wages when they're making more than they've ever been, therefore creating not only an ever-increase gap between the rich and poor, but also a huge gap in the affordability of living, then I can safely say that they are in the moral, ethical, economic, societal wrong, and it is sick and disgusting to say that they have an obligation out of self interest to let, oh say, the third of the population of children in America to live below poverty. Does the welfare system need to be reworked? Of course it does. I see it abused frequently- but not nearly to the extent that these millionaires and billionaires are exploiting the tax system. We have people accusing the poor of being welfare queens and free loaders, but when there are [I]literally no other opportunities for survival in the vast majority of the country because of the economic conditions brought about not simply because of the economic climate, but directly due to the excess and greed of the richest 20% of the nation[/I], then what do you expect? That is to say- only in 1982 have corporate tax rates been this low- yet corporate investment rates are the [I]lowest that they've ever been outside of the recession itself[/I]. A lower tax rate [I]does not indicate nor set up conditions in which the rich are willing to invest their wealth[/I]. Yet the [I]top 10% tax bracket is the only tax bracket that has had an increase in earnings[/I], while [I]the lower 80% have had a decrease in earning[/I]. This shows that there is an obvious [I]increase in the gap between rich and poor[/I] over time and that [I]wealth is being concentrated further into the hands of the ultra-rich[/I] and out of the hands of the middle and working class, even as [I]the government has incentivized, at the expense of the working class, corporations to reinvest for the last 8 years[/I]. But they have not. What we do see, though, is an unemployment rate of 8-10% (real unemployment rate between 12 and 19%, and that's not even counting underemployment) from the onset of the recession and continuing until now, but a steady lowering since 2010. Cost of living is inflated by 58% since 1982, and only increasing- the first decrease in the average cost of living was in October by 1.0003%. This is supported when looking at poverty statistics, which show an increase in poverty uninterrupted for decades. What this shows, basically, is this: The rich are getting richer The poor are getting poorer The top 10% is increasing in wealth The bottom 90% is decreasing in wealth Wealth is being concentrated into the hands of the super rich Unemployment is dropping, but The vast majority of new jobs are low-wage While the cost of living is the highest it's ever been And the rich are not reinvesting their wealth Even as corporate taxes are the lowest they've been, excluding one interruption, since well before 1960. So tell me, then, what reasoning is there to make the rich pay less? Even if you don't share my ideological view that all employers are parasites on the labor of others, then you must at least understand that the super-rich are not paying their fair share, and while even given opportunities to re-invest, they are refusing? Surely you must be concerned that the poor-rich gap is larger now than ever, that poverty is greater than ever, and that the cost to maintain a society that is offered no opportunities for the movement of wealth downwards is only going to increase? How exactly do you expect for the poor to survive when there is literally no wealth for them to gain? When the rich have induced economic conditions that cause reliance on minimum income so they can force fewer to work more for less money? It's dependency on a system of starvation. It's hoarding of the worst kind. It's excessive, it's immoral, it's terrible. It's promotion of a system of near-social-darwinism. The rich get richer and the poor and economically/politically disabled are forced to attempt to survive off of the boot scrapings of the ultra-rich who put measly pennies into creating new opportunities for work. I leave you with a couple of facts: In 2011, welfare cost the US 927 billion. Corporate tax loopholes prevented us from gaining just over 1 trillion in tax revenue. Compared to 2008- tax loopholes prevented us from losing only 20 billion in tax revenue. Yet the corporate tax is lower than ever. Sources: [url]http://budget.house.gov/uploadedfiles/rectortestimony04172012.pdf[/url] [url]https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=2342[/url] [url]http://taxfoundation.org/article/federal-corporate-income-tax-rates-income-years-1909-2012[/url] [url]http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/AWI.html[/url] [url]http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33433.pdf[/url]
Corporations shouldn't be expected to be moral and arbitrarily donate money to governments. That isn't how capitalism works. If they're using loopholes, close the loopholes, but don't expect them to pay money when they don't have to. I don't see why this is even being phrased as a rich vs poor issue.
-snip-
[QUOTE=catbarf;38822671]Corporations shouldn't be expected to be moral and arbitrarily donate money to governments. That isn't how capitalism works. If they're using loopholes, close the loopholes, but don't expect them to pay money when they don't have to. I don't see why this is even being phrased as a rich vs poor issue.[/QUOTE] Because it is. There's a limited amount of capital at any given time. When people need this capital to survive, and when there is a shortage of capital in the lower sections of society, directly linked to an over-abundance of capital in the upper sections of society, then it is an issue of how capital is now being distributed properly. To argue that this is irrelevant to the issue because people should not be expected to contribute to their society beyond absolute necessity is simply silly, because the conditions by which the tax loopholes occurred come directly from the political clout and action by those with the capital. The rich create the environment in which the rich benefit so they do not need to pay the taxes. Therefore, this is not a "blame the game not the players", because the "game" is made by a minority of the players- the ones that benefit. It is essentially allegorical to a situation in which a robber makes the laws that allow him to steal your shit, and then say "Hey, I shouldn't be expected to [I]not[/I] rob you. This isn't about me taking from you, or the relationship between you and me, this is about the [I]laws[/I] that allow me to do it". Do not make the mistake that the political and economic environment is not the result of one class of people working to advantage themselves against the interest of the other classes. In this way, it is absolutely a matter of "rich vs poor"- because it is the rich taking the necessary resources of the poor, and working to provide the legal methods to do this.
[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];38822861']Because it is.[/QUOTE] Is it? The rich in this country are not forcing the poor to stay poor. Every single rags to riches story is evidence of this, Garry's success being the most obvious example. He didn't start rich. No one ever does (well, some do, but most don't). They earn that through hard work and perseverance. So in your mind, what would cause the poor to stay poor? [editline]December 13th, 2012[/editline] By the way, I [i]really[/i] like your avatar. :v:
[QUOTE=Kartoffel;38823127]Is it? The rich in this country are not forcing the poor to stay poor. Every single rags to riches story is evidence of this, Garry's success being the most obvious example. He didn't start rich. [B] No one ever does. [/B] They earn that through hard work and perseverance. So in your mind, what would cause the poor to stay poor?[/QUOTE] Well one thing's for sure: you're never going to get rich smoking that much crack.
[QUOTE=Mingebox;38823157]Well one thing's for sure: you're never going to get rich smoking that much crack.[/QUOTE] Right, my mistake. :v: Corrected it to be more accurate.
[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];38822663']:words:[/QUOTE] Also note the US dollar has decreased in value by about 140% since 1982. So in a way, the cost of living has [i]decreased[/i] by a large amount.
[QUOTE=ECrownofFire;38823296]Also note the US dollar has decreased in value by about 140% since 1982. So in a way, the cost of living has [i]decreased[/i] by a large amount.[/QUOTE] The dollar can still screw people over though. It's usually a bad sign when the USD is worth less than the AUD. :(
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;38818234]the fact of the matter is that there are loopholes that allow this to happen. You don't fault the person who uses the loopholes, you fault the people who made the god damn holes possible.[/QUOTE] Yes, tell this to America, quick.
[QUOTE=Ybbats;38823319]Yes, tell this to America, quick.[/QUOTE] We civilians listen. It's the bureaucrats that have their heads up their asses. :(
"Rags to richest" is open to only the smallest percent. Coming from a family where my mother made her way to a master's degree and is working for the county, yet my uncle is still working 3 blue-collar jobs, I have experienced both sides of the "rags to riches". Clearly invention and innovation is the best way to gain in the world- BUT if it were so accessible and easy for anyone to enter into the greater echelons of success simply by hard work or determination, then why are we not all successful? Why are you not a millionaire- why will you most likely never be? Yet somehow, those who are born into the higher classes generally end up in the even higher classes. Social mobility is the lowest it has ever been for the majority- rags to riches is a lost cause, especially now because... The denial of capital to the lower classes by the upper classes is the reason for this lack of social mobility. Because the rich classes are paying less and investing less, and hoarding more, then there is a freeze on the movement of capital. To be socially mobile requires some sort of starting capital- Garry did not pull Gmod out of his ass, he started with existing software and hardware to develop from. Yet this initial capital does not exist in the lower classes- the vast majority of Americans simply have no access to the necessities to move upwards. If you have no ability to advance in society, if you have no starting capital, and if your only option is either reliance on government welfare or obtain mountains of debt while using all of your time to work in amazing shitty jobs, then where can you go? It's perfectly believable for our white middle-American, cultured and internet-connected asses to say "Well if you pull yourself up by your bootstraps and really put in the work..." yet knowing- having lived- the life of the poor, and miserable, then you know the real situation. When I left my home town, the unemployment rate was over 40%. Almost all of my friends had no access to higher education, no funds, no ability to go anywhere in their lives. Like their parents and their parents' parents, they were economically doomed to sustenance labor on farms, or a meager minimum wage job in a local shop or a failing strip mall. The only reason why I'm any different is because my mother got lucky enough to at one point receive a generous grant from the government to provide herself with higher education. From there, her hard work provided her with enough to make it to where we are living comfortably- we're still barely out of "working class", but we're above the poverty line for the first time in our lives. Yet the rest of my family was not so lucky. My much harder working uncle is trapped in economic despair. If all you needed was hard work, then he would be the example of the hard-working American who made it to the top. But he, like so many others, do not have the opportunities. He literally doe snot have the opportunities to move. He is too poor to move from this area. He has no access to anything other than shit jobs, because all there are are shit jobs, and any other jobs require you to have something other than shit jobs. He has no money for education, no money to spend on consumer goods- he has nothing but his 3 blue-collar jobs he works tirelessly. Like so many others, he is trapped. and this is not "by design" per se, but it is a direct, benefiting effect of the hoarding of capital. Because jobs are now in a controllable amount, and under and unemployment is so prevalent, the working poor is desperate for jobs that the upper classes are able to dish out on an as-needed basis, and control the amount that they will pay into these jobs. What once was a salaried position can now be placed on the market for lousy wages, and people will eat it up. Yet these jobs still do not allow for the workers to provide for the heightening costs of living. It eases their financial burden, BUT it does not provide for a disposable income, or even a livable income. So the job market is flooded with people competing for jobs. The better trained and skilled get positions first, leaving the poor and less fortunate to suckle on the lowest of jobs. The poor are trapped below. And the product they make can be sold to the middle class and upper class for a massive profit margin. There is no need for reinvestment or raising wages, since there is still an active market, and any raise in wages can be cancelled out by moving the production to a place with even shittier wages. Basically: The poor are trapped because of a job shortage. The existing jobs are taken by the underemployed skilled workers. The poor must take the lowest positions. These do not provide for a living income. Therefore, the poor must suffice on little to none. Because there is no income able to be put into the necessary costs for innovation, education, or investment, there is no opportunity to bring themselves up socially, economically, or in value or skill. The working poor are destined to keep the same, unless the capital is redistributed to their cause, to allow for the water level of capital to float them to sea level, where they can finally gain firm footing in the market.
I just thought up this tax plan in 20 seconds while I was on the toilet completely drop income tax give businesses a flat tax rate of somewhere around 10-15% make federal minimum wage $10 citizens only pay for what they use (ie. gas tax pays for roads, tuition pays for schools, etc.) businesses have more money to pay their employees citizens have more money to put into the economy everybody wins as with any tax plan that was thought up on the toilet, I'm sure there are plenty of wrinkles that need to be ironed out, but honestly what we've got now is somewhere close to "sacrifice goat to great queen rosie rios" so this can't be any worse
Everyone who is richer than me has abused the system and I deserve more benefits. If there is not equal distribution of wealth then the system is flawed.
[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];38823346'][brick of text that I'm not going to copy][/QUOTE] I can agree with you on a job shortage. What this country needs is more small businesses to create jobs, although it's a matter of getting these businesses off the ground. This is actually one of the reasons why I want to create my own business after I graduate from college, and my sister is actually going to get a bar-tending license so she can be able to open her own tavern. [editline]13th December 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38823385]I just thought up this tax plan in 20 seconds while I was on the toilet completely drop income tax give businesses a flat tax rate of somewhere around 10-15% make federal minimum wage $10 citizens only pay for what they use (ie. gas tax pays for roads, tuition pays for schools, etc.) businesses have more money to pay their employees citizens have more money to put into the economy everybody wins as with any tax plan that was thought up on the toilet, I'm sure there are plenty of wrinkles that need to be ironed out, but honestly what we've got now is somewhere close to "sacrifice goat to great queen rosie rios" so this can't be any worse[/QUOTE] Ironically, that plan you came up with is much simpler than the poo we have now. :v:
[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];38822663']I'm sorry, but as someone who works a semi-shitty minimum wage job (that gets 15% of my paycheck taken out in taxes) to help support my family, and who grew up in a poor rural area to a single mother with no child support or welfare, I can safely say that you can go fuck yourself if you honestly are supporting these monolithic wealth-stealing, hoarding assholes in their castles on the hilltops continuing to exploit the shitty broken system to avoid paying just the fraction of what they should be paying for society.[/QUOTE] Why the fuck would they pay more than they need to?
Warren Buffet is looking more and more like some crazy anomaly.
[QUOTE=Mike42012;38823458]Why the fuck would they pay more than they need to?[/QUOTE] The short of it: Because it's a social obligation, that I explained more in depth in that post. The long version: They're going to kill their own market if they don't.
[QUOTE=Kartoffel;38823406]Ironically, that plan you came up with is much simpler than the poo we have now. :v:[/QUOTE] I'd say so, I summed up the whole thing in 6 lines. I really do think simplicity is key when it comes to monetary policies
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38823498]I'd say so, I summed up the whole thing in 6 lines. I really do think simplicity is key when it comes to monetary policies[/QUOTE] KISS Principle. Works every time! :v:
[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];38823486']The short of it: Because it's a social obligation, that I explained more in depth in that post. The long version: They're going to kill their own market if they don't.[/QUOTE] They are not morally obligated to do shit, corporations are just 'guilds'. They do what gets them the most money. Social obligation doesn't mean anything.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.