Apple's claiming their headquarters is worth only $200

[ARikozuM]

2 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Then blame the tax laws.  If the laws here said I could start negations on council land rates (we don't call them taxes), then I would be doing exactly the same thing, along with thousands of others.  Doesn't make it an affront to intelligence, unless you are insulted by people making the most of the laws they have to abide by. 

I think the difference here is that Apple can keep it in limbo while we can't. Taxes that aren't paid for have to be made up somewhere. 

[Trik'Stari]

2 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

I think the difference here is that Apple can keep it in limbo while we can't. Taxes that aren't paid for have to be made up somewhere. 

While I agree absolutely, I would also point out that we could do to have a government that spends a little less recklessly, regardless of who is at the alleged "helm"

[mr moose]

4 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

I think the difference here is that Apple can keep it in limbo while we can't. Taxes that aren't paid for have to be made up somewhere. 

And who lets them keep it in limbo?  The government can easily close the time a negotiation is permitted to take.  Or even change the law stating that a companies claims must be withing a certain percentage of land value plus capitol improved value. 

 

All I am saying is there are plenty of resolutions for this and they all lie with the government.  No company or individual is ever going to ask to pay more.

[Trik'Stari]

19 minutes ago, mr moose said:

And who lets them keep it in limbo?  The government can easily close the time a negotiation is permitted to take.  Or even change the law stating that a companies claims must be withing a certain percentage of land value plus capitol improved value. 

 

All I am saying is there are plenty of resolutions for this and they all lie with the government.  No company or individual is ever going to ask to pay more.

While I agree that that is true, I would also say that that is a major problem with our current society.

 

 

Capitalism does not mean "make as much money as you can possibly get away with to the detriment of literally everything and everyone else". That perception and attitude is what needs to change as well as people effecting change within their government.

[Jito463]

9 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

Capitalism does not mean "make as much money as you can possibly get away with to the detriment of literally everything and everyone else"

That's true, capitalism simply means being able to benefit from the fruits of your own labor.  In other words, capitalism is the epitome of both personal ownership and individual responsibility.  Some only see it as a means to make profit, but it means far more than that.  The ability to make a profit is merely a side-effect of owning the fruits of your own labor.  Those who would abuse capitalism to rip off others, is only considering the ownership perspective while ignoring the essential responsibility inherent in a truly capitalist system.

[Jito463]

7 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

Due to war obsession, they tend to focus most of it on that

Military spending is one of the few legitimate roles of government in our Constitution.

7 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

oil

Clarification?

7 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

I wonder how much they actually spend on things like infrastructure, education, and more things they should be spending it on

Absolutely none of those things you mentioned are legitimate roles of government, per our Constitution.

 

*EDIT*
Sorry, I should rectify that.  Infrastructure may potentially fall under that, depending your definition of "infrastructure".

Edited August 20, 2018 by Jito463
Correction

[Tech Enthusiast]

16 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Military spending is one of the few legitimate roles of government in our Constitution.

Clarification?

Absolutely none of those things you mentioned are legitimate roles of government, per our Constitution.

 

*EDIT*
Sorry, I should rectify that.  Infrastructure may potentially fall under that, depending your definition of "infrastructure".

While I don't know what is written in there, that sure sounds like a sad constitution you got there.

Along with laws allowing absurd claims like the one mentioned in the topic, you guys really need to get ahold of someone that has the balls to change all the crap that needs fixing.

[AlwaysFSX]

I disagree with taxes assessors and Apple.

 

The value of the place is worth what they paid for the land, labor, and materials. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Drak3]

1 hour ago, valdyrgramr said:

I wonder how much they actually spend on things like infrastructure, education, and more things they should be spending it on.

How much is spent is irrelevant if its spent poorly.

 

Idaho's local governments would much rather build islands in turn lanes, preventing people from turning left*, instead of fixing pot holes in major streets and expanding highway systems to accommodate increasing traffic. It wasn't until the winter of 2016 that a huge section of highway got any proper maintenance, and only because pot holes were becoming so large and unavoidable that any lawsuit against the cities of Nampa and Boise were guaranteed wins for us, the potential plaintiffs.

 

*Onto side streets and into businesses.

 

And with the exception of the US military, I consider most government spending to be as wasteful.

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, valdyrgramr said:

I was just using the military spendings dating back to the cold war, possibly earlier, as an example of poor spendings.

I wouldn't consider military spending an example of poor spending. Not unless you're suggesting our nearly worthless allies to actually beef up their militaries.

[Amazonsucks]

4 hours ago, mr moose said:

No, I call anyone who repeatedly quotes me claiming I represent things I do not trying to encourage a fight is a troll.

 

Edit to make it less aggressive sounding:  I think all companies do that.

 

Don't know if you are aware but people use all companies as examples for all things.  It really just depends on whether you have a personal grudge and can't rationalist your emotions as to how much you do it.   I posted links to evidence that apple haven't got clean hands, but that is a different issue and doesn't legitimize or dismiss this particular situation. 

 

Not ALL companies do that though. There are plenty of companies that dont, and plenty more that dont do it to the degree that companies like apple, google, facebook, microsoft, amazon etc do.

[mr moose]

4 hours ago, Trik'Stari said:

While I agree that that is true, I would also say that that is a major problem with our current society.

 

 

Capitalism does not mean "make as much money as you can possibly get away with to the detriment of literally everything and everyone else". That perception and attitude is what needs to change as well as people effecting change within their government.

 

4 hours ago, Jito463 said:

That's true, capitalism simply means being able to benefit from the fruits of your own labor.  In other words, capitalism is the epitome of both personal ownership and individual responsibility.  Some only see it as a means to make profit, but it means far more than that.  The ability to make a profit is merely a side-effect of owning the fruits of your own labor.  Those who would abuse capitalism to rip off others, is only considering the ownership perspective while ignoring the essential responsibility inherent in a truly capitalist system.

 

Capitalism is literately the noun of the verb capitalise, which means to to take advantage of or to provide with capital.  It is basically profit driven economy that takes advantage where it can.  I personally would rather a capitalist society with regulation than a socialist society without drive (my personal opinion).  However capitalism can go too far (I.E apple decalring $200) which is exactly what this is, apple are capitalising on the government who is allowing them to start negotiations on value at such a low figure.    I don't blame capitalism though, I blame government and society for not keeping it in check.

 

 

40 minutes ago, Amazonsucks said:

 

Not ALL companies do that though. There are plenty of companies that dont, and plenty more that dont do it to the degree that companies like apple, google, facebook, microsoft, amazon etc do.

Not every advantage offered is taken, no,  but that doesn't mean someone else shouldn't take advantage of it. The government allows it, if you don't like it ask your governments to stop allowing it.

[Jito463]

15 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I personally would rather a capitalist society with regulation than a socialist society without drive (my personal opinion).

I would say it seems we're in agreement on that front, though the regulation should be limited and not overly burdensome.

16 minutes ago, mr moose said:

However capitalism can go too far (I.E apple decalring $200) which is exactly what this is

That has nothing to do with capitalism.  At best it's exploiting a loophole, at worst it's blatant lying.  Either way, I wouldn't call it capitalism (anymore than I'd call it socialism, or communism, or any other "ism").

18 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I don't blame capitalism though, I blame government and society for not keeping it in check.

In a truly free market, capitalist system, the only legitimate role of government would be to ensure no blatant abuses of power.  I wouldn't consider what Apple is doing an abuse of power, though.  Utterly ridiculous, but not an abuse.

[mr moose]

3 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

 

That has nothing to do with capitalism.  At best it's exploiting a loophole, at worst it's blatant lying.  Either way, I wouldn't call it capitalism (anymore than I'd call it socialism, or communism, or any other "ism").

 

You can't see how they have capitalized on this.  Regardless of whether we call it a loophole or a lie, they are capitalising on the fact they can do it.

[Morgan Everett]

I tend to think that frivolous ways to avoid taxation like this should be punishable by further, punitive taxation. If certain companies have no sense of corporate responsibility, they can learn the hard way. 

[leadeater]

16 minutes ago, Morgan Everett said:

I tend to think that frivolous ways to avoid taxation like this should be punishable by further, punitive taxation. If certain companies have no sense of corporate responsibility, they can learn the hard way. 

Company tax credit score, the higher the score the lower the tax rate . Then the accountants can play the fine art of paying enough tax to get a lower tax rate to pay less tax, by paying more tax.... .

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

Company tax credit score, the higher the score the lower the tax rate . Then the accountants can play the fine art of paying enough tax to get a lower tax rate to pay less tax, by paying more tax.... .

we have that here, they call them income tax brackets,  there's a stupid crossover between each one where by going just into the next pay bracket you actually pay more tax than you got in the pay rise,  meaning your weekly take home goes down from an increased pay packet.  Fortunately you get it all back at he end of the year but still going a whole year on a lower take home isn't easy for some people.

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

we have that here, they call them income tax brackets,  there's a stupid crossover between each one where by going just into the next pay bracket you actually pay more tax than you got in the pay rise,  meaning your weekly take home goes down from an increased pay packet.  Fortunately you get it all back at he end of the year but still going a while year on a lower take home isn't easy for some people.

We have that here as well, but that's for personal tax not corporate (far as I know).

[mr moose]

Just now, leadeater said:

We have that here as well, but that's for personal tax not corporate (far as I know).

yes, income tax not corporate, your post about paying more to pay less reminded me of it.  

[Amazonsucks]

7 hours ago, mr moose said:

You can't see how they have capitalized on this.  Regardless of whether we call it a loophole or a lie, they are capitalising on the fact they can do it.

Id hardly say that corrupt socialist elements like Tim Cook and his cronies represent capitalism at work.

 

Apple literally makes their garbage in communist China using Foxconn slave labour.

 

Capitalism doesnt include colluding with communists to use slaves to undercut competition. Corporate welfare or slave using companies like Amazon and Apple follow the socialist/communist principles much more than capitalist.

 

Its a typical ploy of those in favor of socialism to point out abusive companies like Apple as a reason why capitalism doesnt work, but its a false premise since there is nothing free market capitalist about using communist slaves and cheating on your taxes.

[mr moose]

7 hours ago, Amazonsucks said:

Id hardly say that corrupt socialist elements like Tim Cook and his cronies represent capitalism at work.

 

Apple literally makes their garbage in communist China using Foxconn slave labour.

 

Capitalism doesnt include colluding with communists to use slaves to undercut competition. Corporate welfare or slave using companies like Amazon and Apple follow the socialist/communist principles much more than capitalist.

 

Its a typical ploy of those in favor of socialism to point out abusive companies like Apple as a reason why capitalism doesnt work, but its a false premise since there is nothing free market capitalist about using communist slaves and cheating on your taxes.

 

none of that makes sense,  you are trying to say the act of capitalising on a cheap labor in china is not capitalizing because why now? 

 

Your rhetoric about Tim cooks political ideals don't change what constitutes capitalist behaviour.

 

Also just so you know, china is becoming more and more capitalist than socialist.

https://www.cato.org/policy-report/januaryfebruary-2013/how-china-became-capitalist

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0486613417717046

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/joac.12121

 

 

There is no real difference to the average worker in an extreme capitalist or extreme socialist country, they both work for terrible low wages, have poor living conditions and are oppressed by larger entities with power.

[Sauron]

8 hours ago, Amazonsucks said:

Id hardly say that corrupt socialist elements like Tim Cook and his cronies represent capitalism at work.

 

Apple literally makes their garbage in communist China using Foxconn slave labour.

If you fail to see how slave labour is the ultimate capitalistic utopia I don't think you understand what capitalism is... China is communist only in name for the most part, if they were truly communists foxconn wouldn't exist and there'd be state sponsored companies in its place (I'm not saying that would be a good solution).

 

Also, are you telling me TIM COOK, ceo of the most valuable company in the world that sells extremely expensive luxury commodities, is a socialist extremist...? Again, I don't think you know what capitalism and socialism are.

[Trik'Stari]

17 hours ago, mr moose said:

 

 

Capitalism is literately the noun of the verb capitalise, which means to to take advantage of or to provide with capital.  It is basically profit driven economy that takes advantage where it can.  I personally would rather a capitalist society with regulation than a socialist society without drive (my personal opinion).  However capitalism can go too far (I.E apple decalring $200) which is exactly what this is, apple are capitalising on the government who is allowing them to start negotiations on value at such a low figure.    I don't blame capitalism though, I blame government and society for not keeping it in check.

 

 

Not every advantage offered is taken, no,  but that doesn't mean someone else shouldn't take advantage of it. The government allows it, if you don't like it ask your governments to stop allowing it.

I agree but I think we as a society can do more than just government regulations.

 

We essentially allow "business" people to be taught in colleges that "take as much as you can however you can as often as you can". We should be teaching how that mentality is 100% harmful to any society and is often the downfall of said society. Regardless of what that society claims to be (the same thing happens in communist societies and socialist societies).

 

 

Overall, I'd love to see regulation limiting the amount of money shareholders are allowed to make back from a company they invest in. At least half of that money rightfully belongs to the people who actually did the fucking work. I'd love to see mandatory profit sharing because it works better than simply raising minimum wage. Sure the companies can still raise their prices, but that only means the people doing the work get more money as well.

 

 

Speaking from a technological standpoint though, this is all folly. We need to focus on getting to a post-scarcity society and dealing with all of the problems that entails. Namely a complete lack of motivation and even potentially a situation where the overwhelming and ridiculous majority of society have no idea how to do anything that could be called "work".

[mr moose]

47 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

I agree but I think we as a society can do more than just government regulations.

 

We essentially allow "business" people to be taught in colleges that "take as much as you can however you can as often as you can". We should be teaching how that mentality is 100% harmful to any society and is often the downfall of said society. Regardless of what that society claims to be (the same thing happens in communist societies and socialist societies).

 

 

Overall, I'd love to see regulation limiting the amount of money shareholders are allowed to make back from a company they invest in. At least half of that money rightfully belongs to the people who actually did the fucking work. I'd love to see mandatory profit sharing because it works better than simply raising minimum wage. Sure the companies can still raise their prices, but that only means the people doing the work get more money as well.

 

 

Speaking from a technological standpoint though, this is all folly. We need to focus on getting to a post-scarcity society and dealing with all of the problems that entails. Namely a complete lack of motivation and even potentially a situation where the overwhelming and ridiculous majority of society have no idea how to do anything that could be called "work".

Vote with your wallets is great, but unfortunately  people are both greedy and lazy in first world countries.

[Amazonsucks]

12 hours ago, Sauron said:

If you fail to see how slave labour is the ultimate capitalistic utopia I don't think you understand what capitalism is... China is communist only in name for the most part, if they were truly communists foxconn wouldn't exist and there'd be state sponsored companies in its place (I'm not saying that would be a good solution).

 

Also, are you telling me TIM COOK, ceo of the most valuable company in the world that sells extremely expensive luxury commodities, is a socialist extremist...? Again, I don't think you know what capitalism and socialism are.

Wow where to begin. Apple extremely expensive luxury goods ????

 

Try a Parmigiani Fleurier watch instead. Apple is cheap, mass produced junk. It is not remotely in the sphere of actual luxury goods or rare commodities.

 

Slavery is the ultimate socialist and communist utopia. Need proof? Look at all the failed socialist and communist states that degenerate into slavedriving shitholes like N. Korea, USSR, Venezuela... 

 

There is plenty of slavery today in socialist/communist countries around the world. Socialism incentivizes corruption on every level while laissez faire capitalism incentivizes hard work.

 

Im sorry that your public education brainwashed you so badly into believing that 2+2=5.