If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Verge)   Old and Busted: One of the wealthiest corporations in the world, with literally billions in cash, commits massive tax evasion schemes. New Hotness: Replace 'evasion' with 'fraud' and add 'lies to government under oath about it'   (theverge.com) divider line 58
    More: Sick, Google UK, Google  
•       •       •

7449 clicks; posted to Business » on 19 May 2013 at 12:21 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



58 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-19 12:28:48 PM
Amazing how progressive companies don't want to pay their fair share of taxes.
Especially those that are part of the 1%.
 
2013-05-19 12:36:32 PM
I bet it was it Haliburton or the Koch brothers.
 
2013-05-19 12:40:45 PM
Do no evil.
 
2013-05-19 12:46:36 PM

douchebag/hater: Amazing how progressive companies don't want to pay their fair share of taxes.
Especially those that are part of the 1%.


Step one: don't pay your fair share
Step two: pay half your fair share but call it 'charity'
 
2013-05-19 12:48:39 PM

douchebag/hater: Amazing how progressive companies don't want to pay their fair share of taxes.
Especially those that are part of the 1%.


Progressive? Isn't Google by far the biggest donator to the GOP (among tech companies) over the last few years?
 
2013-05-19 12:51:24 PM
Google is really a conservative company.  Remember their big stink with Fox News some years ago.  Fox had a problem with linking.. and "wanted them to stop" linking.  They came to a secret deal...  Now you see lots of Fox News links in the Google news page.
 
2013-05-19 12:52:04 PM
GOP = Google Owned Politicians...
 
2013-05-19 01:12:34 PM
Was it evil tax evasion?
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-05-19 01:16:18 PM
Corporations are people, my friend.  So throw their fraudulent asses in jail.
 
2013-05-19 01:19:38 PM
Berkshire Hathaway won't pay their taxes either.  Nor Apple. Nor GE.  Liberal companies think YOU should pay your taxes.
 
2013-05-19 01:23:32 PM
We could simplify the tax code to discourage stuff like this but to advocate sensible regulations like that makes you Capitalist Free Market Randian extremist.

mrlewish: Google is really a conservative company.


So what you're saying is they're not really Scottish.
 
2013-05-19 01:28:05 PM

Nemo's Brother: Berkshire Hathaway won't pay their taxes either.  Nor Apple. Nor GE.  Liberal companies think YOU should pay your taxes.


Citation needed.
 
2013-05-19 01:31:54 PM
They're not using enough smoke and mirrors.
 
2013-05-19 01:39:37 PM

ArtosRC: Do no evil.


Gah! You beat me to it.
 
2013-05-19 01:41:46 PM

ArtosRC: Do no evil. Pay No Taxes


FTFY
 
2013-05-19 01:52:51 PM
subby, i hate headlines with 'replace with' or 'just kidding' or whatever
 
2013-05-19 02:36:53 PM

Nemo's Brother: Berkshire Hathaway won't pay their taxes either.  Nor Apple. Nor GE.  Liberal companies think YOU should pay your taxes.


I don't see a single "liberal" company in your list.

/do you take deductions on your taxes?
//yes?  then why don't you believe in paying taxes?
 
2013-05-19 03:31:21 PM

Nemo's Brother: Berkshire Hathaway won't pay their taxes either.  Nor Apple. Nor GE.  Liberal companies think YOU should pay your taxes.


What's a "liberal company?"
 
2013-05-19 03:43:51 PM

Nemo's Brother: Berkshire Hathaway won't pay their taxes either.  Nor Apple. Nor GE.  Liberal companies think YOU should pay your taxes.


So vote Republican?

Seriously, how is GE, the manufacturer of the XM214 Mini-Gun and countless other military toys, "liberal?" Or Apple, the king of the pro-third-world-labor-to-death business model? I could see where you'd assume Berkshire Hathaway is somehow "liberal", but given that the owner not only pays his taxes in full but also laments that he only has to pay 19% of his income (at least in 2006, according to Wikipedia) while his employees had to pay 33%, I daresay that they do, indeed, pay their taxes.

In short, you really sound foolish in that last post.
 
2013-05-19 04:03:28 PM

FormlessOne: Nemo's Brother: Berkshire Hathaway won't pay their taxes either.  Nor Apple. Nor GE.  Liberal companies think YOU should pay your taxes.

So vote Republican?

Seriously, how is GE, the manufacturer of the XM214 Mini-Gun and countless other military toys, "liberal?" Or Apple, the king of the pro-third-world-labor-to-death business model? I could see where you'd assume Berkshire Hathaway is somehow "liberal", but given that the owner not only pays his taxes in full but also laments that he only has to pay 19% of his income (at least in 2006, according to Wikipedia) while his employees had to pay 33%, I daresay that they do, indeed, pay their taxes.

In short, you really sound foolish in that last post.


Yeah but WB doesn't voluntarily pay 33% of his taxes, so Rock Fartbongo has to hold an umbrella for Sarah Palin.
 
2013-05-19 04:14:42 PM
Was expecting Apple.
 
2013-05-19 04:59:13 PM

gingerjet: I don't see a single "liberal" company in your list.


"Liberals" don't run anything. In fact, there is no such thing as a "liberal"! They don't exist!
 
2013-05-19 06:46:07 PM

gingerjet: Nemo's Brother: Berkshire Hathaway won't pay their taxes either.  Nor Apple. Nor GE.  Liberal companies think YOU should pay your taxes.

I don't see a single "liberal" company in your list.

/do you take deductions on your taxes?
//yes?  then why don't you believe in paying taxes?


So we really shouldn't read anything into Apple's CEO Tim Cook being invited to sit next to the First Lady at the last State of the Union address or Steve Jobs widow being invited to sit next to the First Lady the at the State of the Union address before that?

Or Al Gore being on Apple's Board of Directors?


Also, the issue isn't "taking a deduction".

The issue is using a legal fiction to pretend you didn't have taxable income in the first place.

This is the same sort of bullshiat accounting that the music and movie industries use to claim they never turned a profit so they don't have to pay artists. Now it's just written large to allow the obscenely wealthy to dodge more and more of their share of the tax burden.

Regardless of the ability of the rich to buy whatever tax laws they like, fraudulent tax dodging is immoral behavior even if they pay off the regulators to look the other way.
 
2013-05-19 06:49:54 PM

BullBearMS: gingerjet: Nemo's Brother: Berkshire Hathaway won't pay their taxes either.  Nor Apple. Nor GE.  Liberal companies think YOU should pay your taxes.

I don't see a single "liberal" company in your list.

/do you take deductions on your taxes?
//yes?  then why don't you believe in paying taxes?

So we really shouldn't read anything into Apple's CEO Tim Cook being invited to sit next to the First Lady at the last State of the Union address or Steve Jobs widow being invited to sit next to the First Lady the at the State of the Union address before that?

Or Al Gore being on Apple's Board of Directors?


Also, the issue isn't "taking a deduction".

The issue is using a legal fiction to pretend you didn't have taxable income in the first place.

This is the same sort of bullshiat accounting that the music and movie industries use to claim they never turned a profit so they don't have to pay artists. Now it's just written large to allow the obscenely wealthy to dodge more and more of their share of the tax burden.

Regardless of the ability of the rich to buy whatever tax laws they like, fraudulent tax dodging is immoral behavior even if they pay off the regulators to look the other way.


The stuff in the article is about London and their Dublin office. It's commie Euro taxes they are dodging, I'm surprised you aren't clapping like a trained seal.
 
2013-05-19 06:58:40 PM

Bonzo_1116: The stuff in the article is about London and their Dublin office. It's commie Euro taxes they are dodging, I'm surprised you aren't clapping like a trained seal.


This is something that is done by nearly every multinational corporation.

It's done to avoid paying taxes everywhere. Not just Britain.

This article is just about them tripping over their own dick in Britain.
 
2013-05-19 07:05:33 PM
Bonzo_1116:

The stuff in the article is about London and their Dublin office. It's commie Euro taxes they are dodging, I'm surprised you aren't clapping like a trained seal.

What the hell are you talking about?
 
2013-05-19 07:09:37 PM
i.imgur.com
Avoision.
 
2013-05-19 07:41:08 PM

spawn73: Bonzo_1116:

The stuff in the article is about London and their Dublin office. It's commie Euro taxes they are dodging, I'm surprised you aren't clapping like a trained seal.

What the hell are you talking about?


Google was reporting sales in Ireland where the taxes are 12.5%, as opposed to Britain, where it's 23+%--- where the ad sales actually occurred.

I'm genuinely surprised to hear an echoing silence for an American corporation avoiding the grasping commie Euros with their socialized medicine and other assorted socialistic fun. I would have expected accolades and cheers.
 
2013-05-19 07:42:26 PM

BullBearMS: Bonzo_1116: The stuff in the article is about London and their Dublin office. It's commie Euro taxes they are dodging, I'm surprised you aren't clapping like a trained seal.

This is something that is done by nearly every multinational corporation.

It's done to avoid paying taxes everywhere. Not just Britain.

This article is just about them tripping over their own dick in Britain.


It's skanky no matter where they do it.


Google is most certainly not living up to its motto.
 
2013-05-19 07:44:00 PM
Why wouldn't they?

There's almost no prosecution and lackluster punishment for companies and their leaders that screw over the populace. It's a gamble that usual pays off.
 
2013-05-19 07:48:03 PM

Bonzo_1116: Google was reporting sales in Ireland where the taxes are 12.5%, as opposed to Britain, where it's 23+%--- where the ad sales actually occurred.


They transfer the money through Ireland to Bermuda where there is no corporate tax at all.

Google Inc. cut its taxes by $3.1 billion in the last three years using a technique that moves most of its foreign profits through Ireland and the Netherlands to Bermuda.

Google's income shifting -- involving strategies known to lawyers as the "Double Irish" and the "Dutch Sandwich" -- helped reduce its overseas tax rate to 2.4 percent, the lowest of the top five U.S. technology companies by market capitalization, according to regulatory filings in six countries.

"It's remarkable that Google's effective rate is that low," said Martin A. Sullivan, a tax economist who formerly worked for the U.S. Treasury Department. "We know this company operates throughout the world mostly in high-tax countries where the average corporate rate is well over 20 percent."

The U.S. corporate income-tax rate is 35 percent. In the U.K., Google's second-biggest market by revenue, it's 28 percent.

Google, the owner of the world's most popular search engine, uses a strategy that has gained favor among such companies as Facebook Inc. and Microsoft Corp. The method takes advantage of Irish tax law to legally shuttle profits into and out of subsidiaries there, largely escaping the country's 12.5 percent income tax. (See an interactive graphic on Google's tax strategy here.)

The earnings wind up in island havens that levy no corporate income taxes at all. Companies that use the Double Irish arrangement avoid taxes at home and abroad as the U.S. government struggles to close a projected $1.4 trillion budget gap and European Union countries face a collective projected deficit of 868 billion euros.


Yes. This is sleazy. This is definitely evil.

Google is hardly the only company doing it though. Nearly all multinational corporations are dodging paying their taxes in this same manner.
 
2013-05-19 07:48:23 PM
And replace "one" with "all"
 
2013-05-19 08:47:47 PM

BullBearMS: Yes. This is sleazy. This is definitely evil.

Google is hardly the only company doing it though. Nearly all multinational corporations are dodging paying their taxes in this same manner.


Most major economies require the structure of such transactions to be disclosed and economically justified to the taxing authorities, and the structure is legal in the affected states.  If those states wanted to eliminate it, they could.

No one is under a moral obligation to structure his affairs in a way that maximizes the tax man's take.  This is not evil.

And "nearly all" multinationals aren't dodging their taxes through that structure.  That particular structure is mainly useful for multinationals with significant income in the EU derived from intellectual property.
 
2013-05-19 08:58:25 PM

Nicholas Urfe: BullBearMS: Yes. This is sleazy. This is definitely evil.

Google is hardly the only company doing it though. Nearly all multinational corporations are dodging paying their taxes in this same manner.

Most major economies require the structure of such transactions to be disclosed and economically justified to the taxing authorities, and the structure is legal in the affected states.  If those states wanted to eliminate it, they could.

No one is under a moral obligation to structure his affairs in a way that maximizes the tax man's take.  This is not evil.

And "nearly all" multinationals aren't dodging their taxes through that structure.  That particular structure is mainly useful for multinationals with significant income in the EU derived from intellectual property.


The fact that the obscenely wealthy can buy any tax laws they like does not make tax dodging OK.

dl.dropboxusercontent.com

The obscenely wealthy have damn near managed to completely eliminate corporate taxes as a source of income for the Federal Government.

The, as individuals, the Bush Capital Gains tax cut that should have expired this year, was instead saved by both parties working together. Now the filthy rich permanently pay less in taxes on their major form of income than working stiffs making only about 35K a year pay.

Meanwhile, through the magic of Transfer Pricing, the corporations the filthy rich have set up get to dodge their fair share of the tax burden as well.

It's obscene. It's definitely evil, no matter how many politicians they bribed to make it legal.
 
2013-05-19 09:08:23 PM

Nicholas Urfe: And "nearly all" multinationals aren't dodging their taxes through that structure. That particular structure is mainly useful for multinationals with significant income in the EU derived from intellectual property.


I'll address this particular bit of bullshiat separately. This is happening everywhere. Not just the EU.

Tyler Hurst swiped his debit card at a Walgreens pharmacy in central Phoenix and kicked off an international odyssey of corporate tax avoidance.

Hurst went home with an amber bottle of Lexapro, the world's third-best selling antidepressant. The profits from his $99 purchase began a 9,400-mile journey that would lead across the Atlantic Ocean and more than halfway back again, to a grassy industrial park in Dublin, a glass skyscraper in Amsterdam and a law office in Bermuda surrounded by palm trees.

While Forest Laboratories Inc., the medicine's maker, sells Lexapro only in the U.S., the voyage ensures most of its profits aren't taxed there -- and they face little tax anywhere else. Forest cut its U.S. tax bill by more than a third last year with a technique known as transfer pricing, a method that carves an estimated $60 billion a year from the U.S. Treasury as it combines tax planning and alchemy. (See an interactive graphic on Forest's tax strategy here.)

Transfer pricing lets companies such as Forest, Oracle Corp., Eli Lilly & Co. and Pfizer Inc., legally avoid some income taxes by converting sales in one country to profits in another -- on paper only, and often in places where they have few employees or actual sales.

U.S. companies amassed at least $1 trillion in foreign profits not taxed in the U.S. as of the end of last year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. That cumulative total, based on filings by 135 companies, increased 70 percent over three years, from $590 billion in 2006.

While some of the offshore earnings reflect sales abroad, much of the growth results from expanding use of transfer pricing, said Martin Sullivan, a tax economist who formerly worked for the Treasury Department and Arthur Andersen LLP.

The system allows for creating paper transactions between subsidiaries of the same company to allocate expenses and profits to selected countries. For instance, when technology firms license their patents to offshore subsidiaries in low-tax countries, profits from sales overseas are booked to the foreign units, not the U.S. parents. The tax savings add to profits.

"A very significant part of this accumulation of profits offshore is the artificial shifting of profits using transfer pricing," said Sullivan, now a contributing editor to the trade publication Tax Notes. "There's been a significant increase in its aggressiveness over the past decade.


So here we have an American drug company whose sales are all in the US, yet they manage to use Transfer Pricing to dodge paying the tax on those sales.

Just as Google is doing with ad sales in Britain.
 
2013-05-19 09:11:37 PM
Another article for people interested in just how widespread the Transfer Pricing tax dodging scam is.

Procter & Gamble, the Cincinnati-based company behind Pampers diapers and Tide detergent, reported a federal tax burden in 1969 that was 40 percent of its total profits, a typical rate in those days.

More than four decades later, P&G is a very different company, with operations that span the globe. It also reports paying a very different portion of its profits in federal taxes: 15 percent.

The world's biggest maker of consumer products isn't the only one. Most of the 30 companies listed on the country's most famous stock index, the Dow Jones industrial average, have seen a dramatically smaller percentage of their profits go to U.S. coffers over time, even as their share prices have driven the Dow to an all-time high.

A Washington Post analysis of data from S&P Capital IQ, a research firm, found that in the late 1960s and early 1970s, companies listed on the current Dow 30 routinely cited U.S. federal tax expenses that were 25 to 50 percent of their worldwide profits. Now, most are reporting less than half that share.

The reason is not simply a few loopholes tucked deep in the tax code. It's far bigger: the slow but steady transformation of the American multinational after years of globalization. Companies now have an unprecedented ability to move their capital around the world, and the corporate tax code has not kept up with the changes.

Just the opposite, in fact. Experts say the U.S. code has encouraged companies to shift their income overseas, where it is more lightly taxed by the U.S. government. Many firms, in turn, have discovered that just as they can move their manufacturing to other parts of the world, so, too, can they shift their income to far-flung tax havens such as the Cayman Islands.

The result is lower revenue here that could pay for infrastructure, education and other services that support domestic growth - and that make life easier for U.S. firms.
 
2013-05-19 09:21:34 PM

digistil: douchebag/hater: Amazing how progressive companies don't want to pay their fair share of taxes.
Especially those that are part of the 1%.

Progressive? Isn't Google by far the biggest donator to the GOP (among tech companies) over the last few years?


Farking allah WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN?!? Google is up to it's eyeballs in Obama donations.
MOH-HA-MED! Don't try and twist it around. G is as liberal as can be; if they have *any* money to the GOP or Rep Congressmen is was to cover their bases.
 
2013-05-19 09:23:59 PM

Nemo's Brother: Berkshire Hathaway won't pay their taxes either.  Nor Apple. Nor GE.  Liberal companies think YOU should pay your taxes.


Exactly.

How about Apple? Are you people going to sit here and say that Apple is a 'progressive' read 'liberal' company?

If you are you will embarrass yourself. Just because a company isn't as liberal as YOU doesn't mean it isn't liberal.
 
2013-05-19 11:15:48 PM
Did we say "Do no evil"? Because we thought everybody knew that we meant "Do know evil".
 
2013-05-19 11:24:58 PM
So what do the Irish and Dutch get out of these arrangements? Shouldn't we kind of be pissed at them too? Also, Delaware.
 
2013-05-20 12:14:30 AM

ArtosRC: Do no evil.


Taxes are theft.  Theft is evil.

Google is doing no evil.

Ta da!
 
2013-05-20 01:44:51 AM

baorao: So what do the Irish and Dutch get out of these arrangements? Shouldn't we kind of be pissed at them too? Also, Delaware.


I think they get a complimentary hand job and a slap on the ass.
 
2013-05-20 02:12:12 AM
Are people really discussing the political leanings of the filthy rich?
They don't have political parties- they create them. They have no connection to any country.
 
2013-05-20 05:21:53 AM

Nicholas Urfe: Most major economies require the structure of such transactions to be disclosed and economically justified to the taxing authorities, and the structure is legal in the affected states.  If those states wanted to eliminate it, they could.No one is under a moral obligation to structure his affairs in a way that maximizes the tax man's take.  This is not evil.


So deliberately lying to the regulator about how you are actually doing business to avoid tax that is due is not tax evasion now?

The only problem with this is that the worst case is they will be fined less than they gained from the tax evasion. If we really wanted to deal with this problem we need to be sending senior management to jail for years for falsifying tax returns in this way.
 
2013-05-20 06:41:13 AM

douchebag/hater: Nemo's Brother: Berkshire Hathaway won't pay their taxes either.  Nor Apple. Nor GE.  Liberal companies think YOU should pay your taxes.

Exactly.

How about Apple? Are you people going to sit here and say that Apple is a 'progressive' read 'liberal' company?

If you are you will embarrass yourself. Just because a company isn't as liberal as YOU doesn't mean it isn't liberal.


Define "liberal"
 
2013-05-20 06:58:22 AM

Evil Twin Skippy: douchebag/hater: Nemo's Brother: Berkshire Hathaway won't pay their taxes either.  Nor Apple. Nor GE.  Liberal companies think YOU should pay your taxes.

Exactly.

How about Apple? Are you people going to sit here and say that Apple is a 'progressive' read 'liberal' company?

If you are you will embarrass yourself. Just because a company isn't as liberal as YOU doesn't mean it isn't liberal.

Define "liberal"


Better yet:  Stop letting political astro-threadshiatters get away with this.  It does not matter what those company's politics are, they are stealing from your economy and nemo's brother is being paid to make you look the other way.
 
2013-05-20 08:06:23 AM

mrlewish

Google is really a conservative company.

and

malle-herbert

GOP = Google Owned Politicians...

Top Contributors to barack obama
... Google Inc $801,770


Microsoft and Google employees among top donors to Obama campaign
Recent data released by the Federal Election Commission on October 21 show that Microsoft employees have given $680,769 to the Obama campaign, and Google employees have given $661,996,


Google Execs Still Backing President Obama for Reelection
Leading the way is Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt, who served as an adviser to then-Sen. Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign and is now a member of the President's Council of Advisers on Science and Technology. Schmidt has given $5,000 to the Obama reelection campaign and an additional $30,800 to the Obama Victory Fund, the joint fundraising committee for Obama and the Democratic National Committee, according to Federal Election Commission records.

Schmidt's support was matched by Google cofounder Sergey Brin and Chief Legal Officer and Senior Vice President David Drummond, both of whom gave $5,000 to Obama and $30,800 to the Obama Victory Fund.

In the company's Washington office, Vint Cerf, Google vice president and chief Internet evangelist, who was a pioneer in the development of the Internet, has given $5,000 to Obama and $17,900 to the Obama Victory Fund.

Other Obama contributors from Google in the Washington area include State Policy Counsel John Burchett, who has given $2,000; as well as Global Ethics and Compliance Counsel Amol Naik, Privacy Policy Counsel David Lieber, and Jordan Bookey, manager of K-12 talent and outreach, who each gave $500.

In all, Obama has received more than $737,000 from Google-related donors



Silicon Valley donations to Obama reach record levels
"A small set of e-elites, 36 in all, had given the president $35,800 maximum checks through the end of March. The group includes familiar names such as Craigslist founder Craig Newmark, Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg and Google Chairman Eric Schmidt...

...four out of every five bucks from Googlers going to Obama, at a total of $200,000.



98% of search engine's employees gave money to Democrats
(CNN/Money) - Google Inc. employees took out their wallets and showed overwhelming support for the Democratic Party last year


Don't let Facts get in the way of your derp.
 
2013-05-20 08:14:49 AM

OnlyM3: mrlewish

Google is really a conservative company.
and

malle-herbert

GOP = Google Owned Politicians...

Top Contributors to barack obama
... Google Inc $801,770


Microsoft and Google employees among top donors to Obama campaign
Recent data released by the Federal Election Commission on October 21 show that Microsoft employees have given $680,769 to the Obama campaign, and Google employees have given $661,996,


Google Execs Still Backing President Obama for Reelection
Leading the way is Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt, who served as an adviser to then-Sen. Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign and is now a member of the President's Council of Advisers on Science and Technology. Schmidt has given $5,000 to the Obama reelection campaign and an additional $30,800 to the Obama Victory Fund, the joint fundraising committee for Obama and the Democratic National Committee, according to Federal Election Commission records.

Schmidt's support was matched by Google cofounder Sergey Brin and Chief Legal Officer and Senior Vice President David Drummond, both of whom gave $5,000 to Obama and $30,800 to the Obama Victory Fund.

In the company's Washington office, Vint Cerf, Google vice president and chief Internet evangelist, who was a pioneer in the development of the Internet, has given $5,000 to Obama and $17,900 to the Obama Victory Fund.

Other Obama contributors from Google in the Washington area include State Policy Counsel John Burchett, who has given $2,000; as well as Global Ethics and Compliance Counsel Amol Naik, Privacy Policy Counsel David Lieber, and Jordan Bookey, manager of K-12 talent and outreach, who each gave $500.

In all, Obama has received more than $737,000 from Google-related donors


Silicon Valley donations to Obama reach record levels
"A small set of e-elites, 36 in all, had given the president $35,800 maximum checks through the end of March. The group includes familiar names such as Craigslist founder Craig Newmark, Facebook COO Sher ...


Huh, I could have sworn Google, MS, and their employees also gave money to the GOP. Guess I was wrong.
 
2013-05-20 09:25:30 AM

FormlessOne: Nemo's Brother: Berkshire Hathaway won't pay their taxes either.  Nor Apple. Nor GE.  Liberal companies think YOU should pay your taxes.

So vote Republican?

Seriously, how is GE, the manufacturer of the XM214 Mini-Gun and countless other military toys, "liberal?" Or Apple, the king of the pro-third-world-labor-to-death business model? I could see where you'd assume Berkshire Hathaway is somehow "liberal", but given that the owner not only pays his taxes in full but also laments that he only has to pay 19% of his income (at least in 2006, according to Wikipedia) while his employees had to pay 33%, I daresay that they do, indeed, pay their taxes.

In short, you really sound foolish in that last post.


Berkshire Hathaway makes most of its profits in insurance, which many liberals around here will tell you is the evilest evil that ever evilled. Of course, making any type of profit is evilly evil to them as well.
 
2013-05-20 10:05:53 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: Berkshire Hathaway makes most of its profits in insurance, which many liberals around here will tell you is the evilest evil that ever evilled. Of course, making any type of profit is evilly evil to them as well.


Insurance is government mandated gambling. With my car insurance, I get no peace of mind paying my insurance, I just watch what little I have get thrown down a hole and know that even if it ends up being needed, I won't get to benefit because my car is "old." Worse, it only has about $200,000 coverage if I get drunk (I don't drink) and hit someone and hurt them, so likely it won't stop the lawsuits from coming anyway.

Health Insurance is even worse. Originally designed to cover catastrophic situations, now it's required to even see a doctor. Rates with them are so high now that even paying cash, a 10 minute visit is over $100 because malpractice insurance takes over half of that right off the top.

Insurance in its original form is good. What we have now is not insurance. They're leeches, plain and simple.

/other profits are generally fine.
 
Displayed 50 of 58 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report