|
W∴ Balboos wrote: Were I Apple, I'd start closing all EU operations as soon as possible
I hope I live to see that day 
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Strongly disagree there. Just because a handful of government suits decide to give away their nation's money doesn't mean that Apple should be getting away with that.
The EU is right in drawing the line. Sure nations should be competing with tax rates if they are rooted in efficiency, but this was a bullshit deal.
Wout
|
|
|
|
|
wout de zeeuw wrote: Just because a handful of government suits decide to give away their nation's money
Well, as near as I can tell, that's the problem and responsibility of those who put them there.
Oh - by the way - did the Irish complain about this? Ooooops (again)?
wout de zeeuw wrote: The EU is right in drawing the line.
The line they drew is clear - they can do whatever they want to do whenever we want to do it - because they sit getting fat in Brussels and hem and haw - and only think of the short term.
There's a big world out there looking desperately for investment.
The EU's playing with fire - I hope the burn leaves a nice deep scar.
| 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: Well, as near as I can tell, that's the problem and responsibility of those who put them there.
Except that people didn't vote for this. This kind of bullshit deals is done in back rooms by individuals whilst having some champagne, and people only find out about these deals years later.
W∴ Balboos wrote: Oh - by the way - did the Irish complain about this? Ooooops (again)?
The Irish did not and still do not have a great position, they are afraid that without these deals the companies won't stay. And this is the problem. These mobster companies are hawking for countries that are desperate for jobs, and that are willing to sign away their lives for it. The EU is doing the right thing in stopping these maffia companies from exploiting the weak point in its armor.
W∴ Balboos wrote: The line they drew is clear - they can do whatever they want to do whenever we want to do it - because they sit getting fat in Brussels and hem and haw - and only think of the short term.
Quite the opposite. The Irish government was doing whatever it wanted, and the EU is saying: no you can't do whatever you want, you can't give one company a big advantage compared to another company. It's not arbitrary, Apple should pay taxes that is in line that what other companies are paying.
W∴ Balboos wrote: There's a big world out there looking desperately for investment.
The EU's playing with fire - I hope the burn leaves a nice deep scar.
Not worried about that. Surely the world needs investment, and paying taxes is part of that. Apple makes great products (but not indispensible). It does not, and should not need unfair advantages to be able to compete. If they need money laundering deals with fantasy constructs like non-existing head quarters[^], let them exploit some other little country. If companies will leave Ireland, that might give some short term transitional issues, but the EU will help them out with this.
Wout
|
|
|
|
|
At this point your flailing for ways to excuse the inexcusable and ignoring the reality:
wout de zeeuw wrote: Except that people didn't vote for this.
- which people? The French did vote to put in the lawmakers for Ireland? The Irish put them in and could vote them out any time they want to. That's how representative government works.
wout de zeeuw wrote: The Irish did not and still do not have a great position, they are afraid that without these deals the companies won't stay
And so what's your point? With the deals they will - and otherwise they'd probably never have even seen their backside. That's the central point of the whole thing - they needed the development more than they needed the taxes. Their choice, and probably a damn good one.
wout de zeeuw wrote:
Quite the opposite. The Irish government was doing whatever it wanted, and the EU is saying: no you can't do whatever you want,
So Ireland is a vassal state of the 'suits' in Brussels - who'll be filling their fat faces with EU sponsored banquet dinners whilst discussing how to muck up whatever is left? To write laws retroactively is totally immoral - in the US we had the wit to put it in the original constitution. You guys in Europe? Apparently not so much. I guess you prefer the Erdogan model as applied to business.
I can hear it all now blaring from the TV on "France 24":
How dare you conduct such business in the EU. That will be against the law! You will be prosecuted and punished! for violating EU rules we will write especially for you. Also, we have decided that the new national language of Ireland will henceforth be Esperanto. Now, get us some more wine. The meeting isn't over.
| 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: - which people? The French did vote to put in the lawmakers for Ireland? The Irish put them in and could vote them out any time they want to. That's how representative government works.
I'm saying the tax rulings where never on any party program, therefore the (Irish) people did not vote for it. Did the US people vote for the wrongful invasion of Iraq for alleged weapons of mass destruction? Democracy is a flawed mechanism, and governments hardly do what people voted for.
W∴ Balboos wrote: And so what's your point? With the deals they will - and otherwise they'd probably never have even seen their backside. That's the central point of the whole thing - they needed the development more than they needed the taxes. Their choice, and probably a damn good one.
The point was already pretty clear, but here it is again: nations need to compete on merit, not on how much money they're giving away to lure a fish.
W∴ Balboos wrote: So Ireland is a vassal state of the 'suits' in Brussels - who'll be filling their fat faces with EU sponsored banquet dinners whilst discussing how to muck up whatever is left? To write laws retroactively is totally immoral - in the US we had the wit to put it in the original constitution. You guys in Europe? Apparently not so much. I guess you prefer the Erdogan model as applied to business.
You are making things up, laws are not written retroactively. It was already illegal to give tax benefits to a selection of companies. This is now being enforced. I don't care who's getting fat, but Apple does have to play by the EU rules. Besides, the 13.5% tax or so is still low, I wouldn't be screaming rip off about that.
Wout
|
|
|
|
|
wout de zeeuw wrote: You are making things up, laws are not written retroactively. It was already illegal to give tax benefits to a selection of companies
""They don't have responsibility for taxes and they are opening a back door through state aid to influence tax policy in European countries when the European treaties say tax policy is a matter for sovereign governments," he added."
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-apple-taxavoidance-idUSKCN114211[^]
You may reply, but as of this post I'll comply with sensible "take it to the SoapBox requests
| 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 |
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for agreeing that laws are not retroactively being changed. Your quote doesn't provide any argument, it's the view point of the Irish Finance Minister Michael Noonan who is desperate to keep the big coorperations in. The EU rightfully wants to level the playing field.
How this all plays out exactly will be decided in court anyway, and most likely some compromise will be struck. But the party is definitely over for companies like Apple.
Wout
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: they can do whatever they want to do whenever we want to do it - because they sit getting fat in XXXX and hem and haw - and only think of the short term.
That could be applied to the USA as well in many fields of life and business
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Nelek wrote: That could be applied to the USA as well in many fields of life and business
That's so generic a pronouncement it actually passes no information.
"Could Be Applied" - anything "could be applied"
"Many" is an arbitrary amount
"Many fields of life and business" - to make sure there's something somewhere it applies to.
I'm not saying you're wrong - your statement is so written as to be impossible to be wrong.
| 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 |
|
|
|
|
|
This is the insider news... not the soapbox
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps this thread should die now - and continue in the Soapbox instead. It's moved well beyond simple commentary into political mudslinging on all sides and there are fora for that here; let's go with the appropriate one.
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
Totally agree. As everybody seems to know everything here, maybe letting it die would be best.
|
|
|
|
|
I said exactly the same before reading your message
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, it was Ireland broke EU law by offering a one-off deal to Apple, that counts as State aid
If you truly believe Apple had no part in this negotiation, you're naive to put it mildly. Why else do you think they channel all EU income through Ireland? Add to that the fact that Apple also keep their money out of the US to avoid US taxes, and a global picture starts to emerge.
We really do need to tighten the screws on large multinationals undertaking enormous tax evasion (in this case) and avoidance. Because it's us consumers who have to cover for them in increased personal taxation.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Surely it's a simple as [of course it never is] Ireland has a Corporation tax rate and it should be the same for every company operating out of there. Ireland can [and do] set their own corporation tax rates.
The EU are there to enforce it, both because they want to ensure competition is fairer between EU states, and also because as a whole they have a lot more power than maybe Ireland does on it's own. Even if Apple paid the going rate in Ireland, it would still be lower than most of the EU, which is why they based themselves there in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
For those cheering this, beware that if you work for a multinational firm the EU is likely coming after your company next. What those companies can't pass onto customers, they'll make up for by slashing jobs.
Of course, you could just vote the EU out-of-office. Oh, wait, you can't.
|
|
|
|
|
We have seen demonstrations of two types of cyber attacks against STJ implantable cardiac devices (“Cardiac Devices”): a “crash” attack that causes Cardiac Devices to malfunction – including by apparently pacing at a potentially dangerous rate; and, a battery drain attack that could be particularly harmful to device dependent users. Despite having no background in cybersecurity, Muddy Waters has been able to replicate in-house key exploits that help to enable these attacks. Reminds me of an old Geek and Poke cartoon:
http://geek-and-poke.com/geekandpoke/2011/10/10/geeks.html[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Should be "Root in pace" should it not?
... such stuff as dreams are made on
|
|
|
|
|
That does it. 
|
|
|
|
|
As part of his annual "personal challenge," he wanted to build an AI capable of controlling his home. Everyone wants to be Tony Stark
|
|
|
|
|
So? Steve Ciarcia (of Ciarcia's Circuit Cellar, BYTE) was doing this sort of thing more than 30 years ago, albeit without voice control.
Zuckerberg's system is less flexible than Ciarcia's - even other members of the household can't use it. What's the big deal?
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Pfeffer wrote: What's the big deal?
I was thinking the same thing.
Bill Gates did this back in 1995 or so when he built his mega-house.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: It's awesome because I get to interact with all these Facebook engineers who are doing all this awesome AI work in speech recognition, in face recognition...
So it's not actually Zoidberg who built it? Gotta love a manager who uses up other people's time and then has the gall to call it "my project".
|
|
|
|
|
That, surely, must be one of the most tempting targets for hackers in the history of computing.
May be he should call it HAL: "I'm sorry, I cannot do that Mark".
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
