anton zuykov

fastasleep said:

toddzrx said:

fastasleep said:

rcfa said:

It’s amazing that those decrying socialism the loudest are the same people enthusiastically dishing out handouts to corporations.

So much this.

Not so much this.  The statement makes no sense.  Think about it.

Compelling argument.

anton zuykov said:

fastasleep said:

rcfa said:

It’s amazing that those decrying socialism the loudest are the same people enthusiastically dishing out handouts to corporations.

So much this.

What is really amazing is that some NPSc do not understand that a tax cut is not a handout. 

Let me clarify it: 

HANDOUT - is when you do not own the money, that someone else generated, yet you ended up getting the money (for some obscure reason), despite having NO connection to the chain of a producer <----> a consumer .

TAX CUT - is when you actually made those money as a person/company by generating value, and then the gov-t allows you to KEEP MORE of your earned money, by taxing your income to a lesser extent.

Do you understand the difference?

It's not just tax cuts, but billions in subsidies aren't handouts? Okay, great, thanks for the etymology lesson — but what's your fucking point?

The people decrying socialism are mad about what they perceive to be handouts, whether it's tax breaks or other subsidies. This isn't any different, except it's being applied to a fucking profitable international mega-corporation that absolutely 100% does not need these subsidies, whereas we have people in our country working full time and struggling to stay above water. Foxconn should pay every cent for what they need to set up shop in that state. It's bullshit.

My point is that incentives =/= handouts. Your mistake (as a socialist) is to think that you or someone else is entitled to the fruits of another person’s/company labor. You are not, and as such, you misconstrued tax incentives for “hand outs”.
That is what my (i quote) “fucking point” is.
Another mistake economically illiterate, like you, often make is thinking that by taxing a corporation, you are taxing that corporation. In reality, that tax ALWAYS gets passed along to the consumer. Corporations themselves always shift the tax burden to the end of the chain - a consumer and they rarely care what the real tax burden is, as long as everyone else has to pay it. So, of course the irony here, is that you scream that companies need to be taxed more, while in reality what you are advocating is that you and other fools will be the ones picking up the tab for that “fair corporate tax”.
IQ curve is a bitch when your are in the middle of the curve, or to the left of the median/mode, I suppose...

fastasleep said:

rcfa said:

It’s amazing that those decrying socialism the loudest are the same people enthusiastically dishing out handouts to corporations.

So much this.

What is really amazing is that some NPSc do not understand that a tax cut is not a handout. 

1STnTENDERBITS said:

That is a terribly written admonition on the back of that card.  It reads as if the Apple gift card won't cover sales taxes on purchases.  There's no context for a person to think it's related to the prevention of an IRS scam.   I seriously doubt anyone making it that far into being scammed is going to be deterred by a warning reads like that.  It would almost be less confusing to have nothing at all.

I agree. If a person is stupid enough not to know how IRS works, that label in red will do NOTHING to fix that.. (and it should not)

lkrupp said:

EsquireCats said:

This happens world wide, and I wonder - how stupid must a person be to believe that their government's tax authority wants, not money, but gift cards.

The result of nothing more than a phone call, no paperwork, nothing.

You don’t have to be stupid to be gullible or greedy.

I am pretty sure, "gullible" implies that a person is stupid enough not to realize it is a scam.

avon b7 said:

anton zuykov said:

avon b7 said:

tmay said:

avon b7 said:

tmay said:

avon b7 said:

tmay said:

I'm sure that Chinese Companies and individuals will see their social scores increase by participating in these boycotts.

The Five Eyes are aligned against Chinese Telecom equipment, and as they should be. There's no odds in a telecom infrastructure from an authoritarian government known for IP theft.

If Apple gets beaten up in China, then I'm  guessing that China will no longer be the supply chain for Apple Products.

http://time.com/5483682/huawei-security-risks-demand-proof/

The Five Eyes already has a lot Huawei gear. Nothing surprising in that. What is new is the US desperately trying to stop Huawei progress for technological and political reasons under the guise of security and doing so, so late in the day that the UK roll out of 5G could be put back by a year and cost a lot more. All without a shred of evidence.

I'm not seeing the need for proof, no more than China would  by banning / eliminating U.S.telecom equipment. Were you aware that Huawei is providing AI hardware to the Chinese Government for upgrading its already intrusive network spying on its own citizens? 

China has an authoritarian government, President for Life, and China is adamant about seizing the South China Sea per it's claims, which bodes ill for international trade. Given the rampant IP theft, and Chinese Hacking, I'm not seeing why democracies would risk using Huawei infrastructure.

Great Britain is in the process of reevaluating Huawei equipment; the rest, including the U.S., have little in the way of Huawei equipment in place, and most of that will be removed or replaced.

https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/australia-no-longer-isolated-as-five-eyes-turn-on-huawei-20181206-p50kk1.html


"In Australia, experts are also concerned about cyber-security attacks against our institutions and businesses emanating from China.

For example, consider recent reports in this newspaper that China’s peak security agency directed a surge in cyber attacks on Australian companies over the past year; and that internet traffic heading for Australia was diverted to China for a six-day period.

There's no suggestion Huawei is in anyway involved in these attacks. But the government's decision to ban it from Australia's 5G networks was certainly based on concerns about China.

"A long history of cyber incidents shows cyber actors target Australia and Australians," Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Mitch Fifield said in their joint statement back in August without directly mentioning China.

"The government considers that the involvement of vendors who are likely to be subject to
extrajudicial directions from a foreign government that conflict with Australian law, may risk
failure by the carrier to adequately protect a 5G network from unauthorised access or
interference."

In other words, the government was concerned that even if Huawei wasn't directly controlled by the Chinese government (the vendor has always denied that it is), under the country's laws it wouldn't be able to resist any demands made on it by Beijing."

Huawei is not China. 

"In other words, the government was concerned that even if Huawei wasn't directly controlled by the Chinese government (the vendor has always denied that it is), under the country's laws it wouldn't be able to resist any demands made on it by Beijing."

Fixed.

Nope. Huawei has denied this. Not directly or indirectly. Huawei says it complies with all the laws in force in the countries where it operates and data is stored for example, in the EU, on servers within the EU.

One thing is China another is the rest of the world. When in China, do as the Chinese does. Comply with the law - just like Apple does.

Not directly or indirectly? If the Chinese gov-t tells you to do something, YOU DO, if you live in China.
But how does it "denied" anything that was said here? You literally have just confirmed that yourself, while disagreeing with the conclusions of "China says, you do" approach. This makes no sense... We know that China spies a lot. We know that some congressmen were briefed on the extent of the problem and that is case that they are trying to conduct not just routine spying but rather, they are trying to infiltrate as many networks as possible to get IP. Guess, how would you do that, if you have companies in China manufacturing NETWORK equipment? SMH

Of course Huawei will deny it. What else can they do - say, yes, we altered all our equipment to accommodate wide-spread network info scooping  the Chinese government is trying to do? Now, please, keep buying out stuff.
What are you smoking?

In China.

Huawei claims out of China, things are different.

As for doing what you are told, forget laws. When governments want something they will do what they can to get it. Often in spite of laws. Especially if they think they can get away with it. Just about ANY government. Some may be considered worse than others but that is often a question of which side of the fence you are on.

No government is immune to this.

As for denying. Why not? Isn't the onus on someone backing up their claims with evidence first?

Huawei operates in China as their main location. It is quite clear even from the reaction of the Chinese govt on the arrest of H highranking  employees. 

And, you are going for another take with the same defense....

While I agree with you on that every govt might attempt something like that in theory, depending on the country and the principles in that particular country, the results will be different. Try killing political diccidents in china and selling their organs illegally. No problem. Google respective articles on that topic yourself, if you will. Try the same shit in the US? Fail. The fact that all govts might abuse power, does not mean they do, or that they do that to the same extent. 

Sure, they can deny all they want, but the reaction of the Chinese govt to the arrest shows quite clearly that the connections between H and the Chinese govt go far beyond just simple business-govt connectins. That + the fact that China is spending enormous resources on stealing IP, makes it impossible to actually create a plausible deniability case here. Sorry.