Apple created offshore subsidiaries to avoid paying billions in US taxes, Senate panel says

123457»

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 133
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

    …exploitation…


     


    There's that word again.

  • Reply 122 of 133
    mj1970mj1970 Posts: 9,002member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Crowley View Post



    Apple have been proven to have done illegal things in the recent past.


     


    They have?

  • Reply 123 of 133
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    There's that word again.




     


    Dont don't that please, we're having a nice conversation.


     


     


    Tax havens are exploitative.  They funnel tax revenue away from the country of the economic activity under secrecy provisions, and enable their exploiters to shield their capital from the normal economy.  They are inextricably linked to the politically corrupt, who sell their state to the financial services industry.


     


    If Apple are utilising tax havens, then that is exploitative.  It isn't illegal, and your opinion may say that it isn't immoral, but it is definitely exploitative.

  • Reply 124 of 133
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post


     


    They have?



    Sure, Apple have been fined for breaching regulations before.  Never in a particularly big way, but it's happened.

  • Reply 125 of 133
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

    PS. This is a very broad statement. 


     


    PS: There you go again, trying to bring in stuff that just plain doesn't matter and has nothing at all to do with the conversation.

  • Reply 126 of 133
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    PS: There you go again, trying to bring in stuff that just plain doesn't matter and has nothing at all to do with the conversation.



    When the conversation is about legality then little things matter, and it's lack of material direct relevance is why it was a PS.  If you don't like, feel free to ignore it, I don't make you reply to anything.


     


    You're being unpleasant again, I wish you'd just discuss like a normal person.

  • Reply 127 of 133
    mj1970mj1970 Posts: 9,002member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Crowley View Post


    Sure, Apple have been fined for breaching regulations before.  Never in a particularly big way, but it's happened.



     


    Please be specific. Link?

  • Reply 128 of 133
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post


     


    Please be specific. Link?



    http://www.google.com/search?btnG=1&pws=0&q=apple+fined


     


    Specifically?  The French working hours one, will that do?


    http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/03/13/french-apple-stores-prohibited-from-making-employees-work-after-hours-fined-10k-euros


     


     


    But as TS said, this isn't relevant to the discussion.  Let's move on.

  • Reply 129 of 133
    mj1970mj1970 Posts: 9,002member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Crowley View Post


    http://www.google.com/search?btnG=1&pws=0&q=apple+fined


     


    Specifically?  The French working hours one, will that do?


    http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/03/13/french-apple-stores-prohibited-from-making-employees-work-after-hours-fined-10k-euros


     


     


    But as TS said, this isn't relevant to the discussion.  Let's move on.



     


    Wow. This seems like a fairly lame stretch. I can see now why you'd want to change the subject back and "move on."

  • Reply 130 of 133
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member


    Why is it a stretch?


     


    Statement:  Apple haven't done anything illegal in any country.


     


    Counter: Apple have been fined for many things over the years, it'd be a truer and more relevant statement to say that Apple haven't been proven guilty of any financial illegality within the current investigation.


     


    That's true enough, the original statement was so broad it was incorrect.  I wasn't making any grand point about Apple being analogous to COBRA image


     


    Anyway, yes, moving on...

  • Reply 131 of 133
    mj1970mj1970 Posts: 9,002member


    It's pretty lame. I suspect you know that. Your implication was one of a company regularly and deliberately engaged in illegal activity not one that has been the mugging victim of a labor union via the French government.

  • Reply 132 of 133
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member


    I don't think anything in my language implied regular or deliberate action, and if you took that implication I'm sorry, I can see that on that basis it may have caused confusion.  It wasn't my intention to imply either, it was just a pedantic PS observation.

  • Reply 133 of 133
    andreyandrey Posts: 108member


    Crowley, are you trying to convince guy, who posts 25 messages a day ... 


     



    • Joined: Aug 2010



    • Posts: 24,585


     


    ... while most of them are to flame opinions other then his? "Shut up", "idiot" ... watch your language, TS. WTB option to vote down posts.

Sign In or Register to comment.