cnocbui

jdgaz said:

All taxes are in the end paid by the consumer in the cost of goods.

No they aren't.

However, all taxes that multinational corporations dodge are eventually made up for by increases in taxes and charges levied on consumers.

apkrfan77 said:

Did any of you happen to see the "60 Minutes" spot on corporate espionage on Sunday? Is everybody going to be aloud to infringe on everybody else's property? How much of an advantage did Samsung gain in the market (when the market was in a huge growth stage) as a result of what is now classified as theft. The damage to Apple is incalculable. Right or wrong, it's a good thing that Apple has the wherewithal to stage this defense of their property. How many companies have failed because of corporate theft? The one presented on 60 minutes nearly did, and a lot of employees and their families were the victims. Maybe one less wont because of the precedents set by this case.

The damage to Apple was near non-existent.  Most of it was self inflicted in the form of legal costs.  Apple has over 200 Billion in the bank and at least one pundit thinks Samsung will exit smartphone manufacture within a few years.  If Samsung gained an advantage, where is that evident?  There is nothing in Apple's sales figures to suggest it has been irreparably harmed.

The alleged infringements are for features so minor in the scheme of things I really find it hard to believe people actually think any purchaser made a purchase decision based on them.  It's like claiming someone bought a Lamborghini instead of a Ferrari because it had the same shaped window winding switches as the Ferrari.

digitalclips said:

Maybe if Apple could bring home the money that it already paid all the legal taxes on overseas and was not facing double taxation if they did, they just might manufacture more here.  IDK, just a thought.  I stand ready to be flamed as it's not a subject I know much about.

There would be no double taxation.  They would get a credit for any taxes paid overseas.  Since they have paid only 1.8% overseas, they would have to pay a sizable difference - which in the end amounts to the same level of tax as domestic earnings.

Why is the issue of repatriation of overseas moneys by US corporations so willfully misrepresented to make it seem as if it's a huge impost on companies when it's not?  There should be no need for talk of a tax holiday or special deal.  The last time corporations were given a holiday on repatriating overseas income with the supposed promise of greater investment in the US, they did no such thing.

Trump is a very dangerous buffoon.

asdasd said:

Also, is that the correct photo? Looks a bit dry for Cork.

They probably didn't want to alarm people further.

foggyhill said:

anantksundaram said:

It's sort of weird, looking back at the history of Apple, how much trouble they've had implementing their networked products. Including iCloud (even though I have a subscription, I almost never use it), Mail (I use it only as a secondary email address), iTunes (although I use it a lot, I have to say that it's a bloated mess), iTunes Connect (glad I have folks who do it for me), Airdrop (brilliant idea, but limited in implementation), Ping (?), FaceTime (not useful if you're trying to talk to a non-Apple user)... The list goes on. 

Facetime is rock solid, more so than skype, so your doing your own narrative here. Icloud, current implementation, is good.
They spun out a 10M a year stream system in a few months, that's pretty solid back-end there.

Facetime is less stable than skype.