maestro64

AppleZulu said:

maestro64 said:

Obviously we have people on both sides some say people should be forced to get vaccinated and some that say it is personal choice. For those who are upset the Government/Companies has not forcing people to be vaccinated here is the reason why, this dates back to the 1920 100 years ago. When the government mandate the force sterilization of men and women, a "government mandate medical procedure." This went on for 50 yrs until the another Supreme court finally stop the practice.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell

The venerated Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote the decision upholding the Virginia law that ended a woman's right to be a mother, by saying it was no different than vaccination:

"The judgment finds the facts that have been recited and that Carrie Buck 'is the probable potential parent of socially inadequate offspring, likewise afflicted, that she may be sexually sterilized without detriment to her general health and that her welfare and that of society will be promoted by her sterilization,' and thereupon makes the order. In view of the general declarations of the Legislature and the specific findings of the Court obviously we cannot say as matter of law that the grounds do not exist, and if they exist they justify the result. We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 , 25 S. Ct. 358, 3 Ann. Cas. 765. Three generations of imbeciles are enough." 

Holmes cites this case about smallpox vaccine and even claims in this case if the vaccine may not be the best solution and may harm the person for various health reason the government still have right to force you to be vaccinate for community heath reason.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobson_v._Massachusetts there has been a lot of except to this law over the years, however, you notice they not willing to use this case law today.

At the Nuremberg trials, Nazi doctors literally cited Buck v. Bell in their own defense. this should make everyone sick.

Buck v. Bell has never been officially overturned. In 1978, however, one victim of forced sterilization sued the State of Oklahoma before the Supreme Court, and won. The decision resulting from Skinner v. Oklahoma created legal obstacles that effectively put a stop to mass compulsory sterilization. 

Everyone in government know about these cases and they know they will go afoul of the law that prevents them from mandating anything medical.

Our government know they can not mandate anything, however, they are making it very hard for businesses to operating unless they mandate vaccination. Case are already making their ways through the court it going to take years but most likely Companies will also run up against the same laws and rights as the government. Notice no one in the media is talking about this and why the government is not mandting. Becuase they do not want you know you have legal rights to do what is in your best interest.

For those who think it is your right to tell others what to do, think again, you have no such right. nether does the government. However, you are free to do what you want to protect yourself and you are free not to associate with people you do not agree with. In this case if you feel you are at risk then get vaccinated and if you do not think that is enough wear the mask or the whole hazmat suit. Nothing I or anyone else is doing is interfering with your ability to protect yourself.

Also company may run afoul under HIPPA, they are not allow to ask anyone about their medial affairs, thus all these volunteer requirements, which are not really volunteer since they are holding your job over your head, most likely will not pass scrutiny once legally challenged.

It will not stop this current government from ignoring the laws of this land and your personal rights they did it with the rent eviction moratorium. They knew they had no legal ground to stop people from being evicted from property they do not own. But government went ahead and did it anyway, Supreme court set them straight, but they again tried to extend the illegal mandate and got told again to stop. This government is only interest in see what they take away from your verse preserving what is rightfully yours.

That is a BS argument. Vaccination mandates are not forced sterilization. Vaccination mandates have been upheld by the courts, including the current Supreme Court. 

Also, HIPPA is not a thing. HIPAA refers to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. Unless you are part of a healthcare entity, the private protections in HIPAA do not apply. HIPAA does not prevent your employer from asking if you are vaccinated, including asking for proof of it. Even if you are part of a healthcare entity, there are exemptions to restrictions on disclosure of health information as it relates to a public health crisis.

I am tired of BS misinformation being spread on this subject. This misinformation is killing people.

Sorry for my Typo, HIPAA applies to any company providing insurance, they are not allow to know anything about your medical records/condition IE healthcare provider can not provide any information about your health unless you volunteer it yourself thus the reason companies are asking people to self disclose. Again they can not mandate it, your heath matter are your private business and the ADA prohibit someone being fire due to their health as well as other laws. If a company wants proof of vaccination they need to request medical record and you have right not to share that with your imployeer. So it basically the honor system. How do I know this I worked with my companies HR Benfits person and had an issue with the insurance company and HR person made it very clear they were not allow to talk to the insurance company about my medical issue in my case my daughters case, unless I specifically gave permisison to share that specific informaiton, only then could the company know the specifics. HIPAA is broader then just health records being portable, the main part of the law is all records must be private and not to be seen by anyone who is not authorize to view those records.

You obviously did not read the cases, the Buck V Bell relied on the vaccine law from 1902 Jacobson v Massachusetts as justification manidate governement medial procedure and over the years. It has been over written and found to be bad case laws as well as there as except to Jacobson v Massachusetts. If the government thought they had strong standing to mandate and force people they would have envoked Jacobson v Massachusetts and they have not becuase they can not. By the way there are whole communites which as not vaccinate in the country and one of the largest one is the Armish communities in various states. It not BS argument, it is the current state of the laws in this country, if you thing it should be different file a law suit saying your person freedom are infringe by someone not being mandated to be vaccinate see how far that goes. 

The only thing killing people is their own personal responsibility to do rigth thing for themselves. Also what is killing people if their own person health habits but no one is talking about that, this is beyond people who are older and have naturally declining health. If you are going to manadite things which you think is killing people, then mandate no one drive that killed more people prior to this, why not manidate health eating since lots of people die every year from poor health due to poor eating, By the way this effect everyone too since we all pay higher cost becuase its killing people. Tell me how someone getting Covid affect your daily life beside the higher cost we will all now pay.

Obviously we have people on both sides some say people should be forced to get vaccinated and some that say it is personal choice. For those who are upset the Government/Companies has not forcing people to be vaccinated here is the reason why, this dates back to the 1920 100 years ago. When the government mandate the force sterilization of men and women, a "government mandate medical procedure." This went on for 50 yrs until the another Supreme court finally stop the practice.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell
Holmes cites this case about smallpox vaccine and even claims in this case if the vaccine may not be the best solution and may harm the person for various health reason the government still have right to force you to be vaccinate for community heath reason.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobson_v._Massachusetts there has been a lot of except to this law over the years, however, you notice they not willing to use this case law today.

At the Nuremberg trials, Nazi doctors literally cited Buck v. Bell in their own defense. this should make everyone sick.

Buck v. Bell has never been officially overturned. In 1978, however, one victim of forced sterilization sued the State of Oklahoma before the Supreme Court, and won. The decision resulting from Skinner v. Oklahoma created legal obstacles that effectively put a stop to mass compulsory sterilization. 

Everyone in government know about these cases and they know they will go afoul of the law that prevents them from mandating anything medical.

Here is good summary but does not lay out a case in either direction, https://www.history.com/news/smallpox-vaccine-supreme-court

Our government know they can not absolutely mandate, however, they are making it very hard for businesses to operating unless they mandate vaccination. Case are already making their ways through the court it going to take years but most likely Companies will also run up against the same laws and rights as the government. Notice no one in the media is talking about this and why the government is not mandating. Becuase they do not want you know you have legal rights to do what is in your best interest.

For those who think it is your right to tell others what to do, think again, you have no such right. nether does the government. However, you are free to do what you want to protect yourself and you are free not to associate with people you do not agree with. In this case if you feel you are at risk, then get vaccinated and if you do not think that is enough wear the mask or the whole hazmat suit. Nothing I or anyone else is doing is interfering with your ability to protect yourself.

Also companies may run afoul under HIPPA, they are not allow to ask anyone about their medial affairs, thus all these volunteer requirements, which are not really volunteer since they are holding your job over your head, most likely will not pass scrutiny once legally challenged. Much of this is on shaky legal ground and the government is hoping it does not go to the Supreme Court to set precedence they do not like, but than again they have not be the smart about it

It will not stop this current government from ignoring the laws of this land and your personal rights they did it with the rent eviction moratorium. They knew they had no legal ground to stop people from being evicted from property they do not own. But government went ahead and did it anyway, Supreme court set them straight, but they again tried to extend the illegal mandate and got told again to stop. This government is only interest in see what they take away from your verse preserving what is rightfully yours.

davidw said:

bruce young said:

Let's see, Tim Cook gets $14,769,259 annual compensation, plus, I saw an article recently that he had just taken $750 MILLION in stock benefits.

Other Apple execs are making similar outrageous amounts of millions of dollars annual compensation.

  reference: <https://www1.salary.com/APPLE-INC-Executive-Salaries.html >
One would think that they could afford to pay taxes. As would the corporation itself.

As pointed out by a previous posts, they use the land, resources, people, infrastructure of this country, (and it is in dire need of support), so they should be happy to make the country stronger...   yes?   no?

You only "saw" the article, did you bother to READ it before making your ignorant comment? Tim Cook was awarded $750M in vested RSU and paid $390M in income taxes out of the $750M award. You can also bet that he also paid over 50% in incomes taxes (for Fed and State) for his $14.8M annual compensation. And most likely all the Apple executives probably paid in the neighborhood of 50% in incomes taxes on their annual salary. 

If you want to collect the most in taxes from corporations, the best way to do that would be to make sure all the profits are awarded to their top executives as bonuses, instead of being taxed at the corporate rate. Bonuses are considered salary and tax deductible from corporate revenue.

Say that a corporation was looking at reporting $100M in profit, but instead decided to award that $100M to their top executives as bonuses. Now the corporation will end up paying zero corporate tax and you will have a hissy fit over this. BUT, when the $100M was awarded as bonuses, it got taxed as salary. Thus, the government collected 37% Fed income tax (as most execs are probably in the top marginal tax bracket), $1.45% Medicare tax and  maybe about 8% in State income tax (in CA it would be 13%). So out of the $100M, the government got at least $45M in taxes when it was awarded as bonuses vs $21M if it were taxed at the corporate rate.  And this don't include the sales tax generated when the executives spends that money.  

As someone that likes collecting more taxes from others, you should be jumping with joy, that Apple is paying their executives outrages amounts of millions of dollars annual compensation, instead of complaining about it. I guarantee you, the IRS is not complaining about it.    

Apple pays over $40M a year in property taxes on just their "spaceship" HQ. Property taxes (and added bonds measures) pays for local police, fire and ambulance services, parks, public transportation, street lights, sewers, etc.. But most goes toward local education. I'm not aware that Apple is not paying property taxes on any of their properties. Be it vacant land or for an Apple Store. I'm not aware that Apple is getting resources like electricity or gas or water or garbage service, for free. Nor not have to pay the gasoline tax, that pays for road maintenance (or least that's what the gas tax is suppose to be for.), bridge tolls or auto registrations for company cars. Nor are they not paying a good salary to their well educated employees. (who in turn can afford to pay back any student loans they might have gotten.)  

 

WOW, someone who understands how the systems works. Only correction, most high income earners have some ways to shelter some of the income from taxes, but those shelters were created by the government and the same people today complaining everyone is not paying their fair share. For those who do not understand this you need to put on your ignorance hat. 

BTW, In 2020 61% of the citizen of this country did not pay any Federal income taxes, This mean that 39% of the balance of people and companies paid all the taxes that run the county. If you are talking about everyone paying their fair share, why aren't people complaining about the 61%, they also benefit from all the services the government provides.

eightzero said:

You can always go to a different lawyer that works for less. Just like you can go to the other App store to sell apps for the Apple products they are designed for. Right?

Actually, I do not believe they are allowed to accepted less. You can pay by the hour, and you get all the winnings, or if the lawyer is working on contingency meaning they assuming all the costs to fight the case you have to pay the 30%, this fee is set by the courts. The hourly rate is the only thing you can negotiate or is different from lawyer to lawyer. 

I work in corporate American and been involved in lawsuits between companies these are never contingency, companies never want to share the winnings so they are willing to pay actual costs. Small companies and private citizens usually do not have deep pockets to go the hourly rate path and its required you to stay on top of it or your billed things you probably did not want to pay for.

80s_Apple_Guy said:

Apple with it’s using USB-C for iPads but Lightning for others has no leg to stand on with this argument. It switched its laptops to USB-C creating huge ewaste. Apple likes to argue both sides of the coin when it comes to its costs. Very disingenuous. 

hackintoisier said:

Apple already uses usb-c/thunderbolt on its laptops, macs, and on the iPad Pro and air.  Unclear why it can’t bring Usb-c to iPhone as well. 

That is because apple product communicate with the charger, and they are using proprietary technology in their chargers. Whether it is USB-C or lightening. Apple does not want to share their technologies with the masses. This is why apple tends to get better performance from their products and batteries since the are controlling the end to end and the protocols. I have used third party chargers with the various apple product and I have seen performance difference and charge times. Apple sees you are using a non apple charger they appear to go into a default charging and powering mode. They do this to protect your Apple products.