Flooding, crop failure, land being made unusable, extreme weather, changing economics that they are unable to adapt to quickly enough.
People who live in the western world don't die by the millions (or even the thousands) from flooding or crop failure or extreme weather. If cheap energy allows India to begin to prosper like it has allowed the west to prosper, then India can expect to begin to achieve the resiliency that westerners have in the face of bad weather.
If India is deprived of their opportunity for progress, they can expect to remain as much at risk from bad weather as they've always been.
Wars over resources
Why would there be wars over resources when fossil fuels are cheap? What resources? The water that's "flooding" them?
extreme poverty as tens or hundreds of millions of people migrate within the country.
Because they've never had a poverty problem? Because people never migrated in the past? But cheap energy and an improved lifestyle will cause extreme poverty.
Do you think people in India will believe this story? Unless the Indian people believe it completely, it's clearly not in their interest to go along with it. You might want to fill in the details for them.
Why should 1 Billion people in India give up on affordable energy and all the improvements it brings to their lives just so a few thousand people can live comfortably in the Marshall Islands?
Facebook isn't really like "Corporate America". Facebook can afford to give expensive benefits to employees because Facebook's business is hugely profitable and growing fast. Most companies have neither Facebook's growth nor Facebook's profit potential. If you expect other companies to be like Facebook, you will be disappointed.
So someone who wants resources from Mars needs to get permission from everyone in the world first?
Presuming someone has the technical means, what's stopping them from just going there and taking what they want? Are the police going to arrest them when they get back? Which country's police?
If you want to stop all progress in space (or any other scientific or technological progress) then go ahead with that idea that nothing is allowed unless governments grant specific permission in advance.
If you save thousands of people from being killed or maimed by measles, polio, malaria, and other diseases in Africa, but you don't bow your head to the left's concerns over patents, then those people you helped don't matter. You must advance the cause. And the cause is about money, not about whether children are crippled by polio or die of measles.
And the experiments to improve education threaten to disrupt the cash flow from teachers' union dues. Stop those too.
No. It's a million times worse than this article could ever possibly suggest. Unrepairable products are worse than Hitler and they will cause a plague of giant, unkillable kitten-eating spiders to build hidden nests in your home and workplace to covertly drain your blood little-by-little when you're distracted -- possibly by the crippling fear that your gadgets might break and you might have to buy the new improved one for yourself. The only thing worse than unrepairable products is people who exaggerate.
How often did Apple employees use U.S. roads, rely on U.S. public education for their children in primary school or college, drink water provided by the state or federal government, use telephone or network infrastructure developed and constructed by the government, benefit from federal safety regulations on aircraft? Do you think all those things appear for your benefit at no cost or obligation from you?
There's a fuel tax to pay for roads. There's a property tax and a state income tax and a state sales tax to pay for education for children. There's a state income tax and a state sales tax and tuition to pay for colleges. There's a water bill from the water district every 2 months to pay for water. There's a telephone bill and a special telephone tax to pay for phones, and an internet bill to pay for Internet. There's an airline ticket tax to pay for air traffic control.
But the question was: what percentage of Apple's profits did the US government earn? Any thoughts on that?
The companies manufacturing the generics will enjoy quite a boom.
And, since almost all of thosegenericdrugcompanies are located overseas for tax purposes, they'll be able to keep most of the profits they earn without paying much in US taxes.
I never knew that nut farmers had such godlike powers.
It's called a telephone. You call up the bee supplier. He arrives with bees. Hives are setup near your crops. Bees pollinate. Later, the bee supplier picks up the hives and invoices you for the bee rental.
I wonder why they're not using those powers right now to bring the perfect amount of rain to California, though.
This is called irrigation.
You must think farmers just have big plots of land and food crops just randomly happen to grow there.
In this case, "these kinds of shenanigans" that have the politicians "looking the other way" are entirely within the rules. The companies are following the rules.
Why should Pfizer "care about" the US? Does the US "care about" Pfizer?
Is there a basis for a mutually friendly relationship (or any other kind of "warm" or "good" relationship) between the US and Pfizer? If so, please explain what this relationship could be based on.
Pfizer makes 60% of it's revenue outside the US. Why should they pay US taxes on profits earned entirely outside the US? Other countries do not tax foreign profits the way the US does.
Obviously Pfizer doesn't think they should be subject to such an unfair system. They found a way out. They will still pay US tax on US profits.
Slashdot Mirror
Obviously you should move to Arkansas.
Flooding, crop failure, land being made unusable, extreme weather, changing economics that they are unable to adapt to quickly enough.
People who live in the western world don't die by the millions (or even the thousands) from flooding or crop failure or extreme weather. If cheap energy allows India to begin to prosper like it has allowed the west to prosper, then India can expect to begin to achieve the resiliency that westerners have in the face of bad weather.
If India is deprived of their opportunity for progress, they can expect to remain as much at risk from bad weather as they've always been.
Wars over resources
Why would there be wars over resources when fossil fuels are cheap? What resources? The water that's "flooding" them?
extreme poverty as tens or hundreds of millions of people migrate within the country.
Because they've never had a poverty problem? Because people never migrated in the past? But cheap energy and an improved lifestyle will cause extreme poverty.
Do you think people in India will believe this story? Unless the Indian people believe it completely, it's clearly not in their interest to go along with it. You might want to fill in the details for them.
... before millions of them die.
Die from what?
Why should 1 Billion people in India give up on affordable energy and all the improvements it brings to their lives just so a few thousand people can live comfortably in the Marshall Islands?
Facebook isn't really like "Corporate America". Facebook can afford to give expensive benefits to employees because Facebook's business is hugely profitable and growing fast. Most companies have neither Facebook's growth nor Facebook's profit potential. If you expect other companies to be like Facebook, you will be disappointed.
Why would non-Facebook employees be interested in this at all?
So someone who wants resources from Mars needs to get permission from everyone in the world first?
Presuming someone has the technical means, what's stopping them from just going there and taking what they want? Are the police going to arrest them when they get back? Which country's police?
If you want to stop all progress in space (or any other scientific or technological progress) then go ahead with that idea that nothing is allowed unless governments grant specific permission in advance.
What are you afraid might happen 10000 years from now? Please be specific.
If you save thousands of people from being killed or maimed by measles, polio, malaria, and other diseases in Africa, but you don't bow your head to the left's concerns over patents, then those people you helped don't matter. You must advance the cause. And the cause is about money, not about whether children are crippled by polio or die of measles.
And the experiments to improve education threaten to disrupt the cash flow from teachers' union dues. Stop those too.
But above average for the news media.
An atheist, a vegan, and a guy who doesn't own a TV walk into a bar. I only know because they told everyone within 2 minutes.
No. It's a million times worse than this article could ever possibly suggest. Unrepairable products are worse than Hitler and they will cause a plague of giant, unkillable kitten-eating spiders to build hidden nests in your home and workplace to covertly drain your blood little-by-little when you're distracted -- possibly by the crippling fear that your gadgets might break and you might have to buy the new improved one for yourself. The only thing worse than unrepairable products is people who exaggerate.
Nope. That's actually what would happen.
Farmers know what they are doing.
He makes a phone call to another bee supplier and gets bees. Bees reproduce more bees. With time and care, his hives end up full of bees.
The bee supplier knows how bees make more bees. When he wants more bees, he raises more bees.
None of this is random chance.
The U.S. Expatriation Tax is not a hardship by any reasonable definition of hardship...
It's not a question of "hardship". Stealing from people is wrong. Even when the victim has some money left over afterward.
How often did Apple employees use U.S. roads, rely on U.S. public education for their children in primary school or college, drink water provided by the state or federal government, use telephone or network infrastructure developed and constructed by the government, benefit from federal safety regulations on aircraft? Do you think all those things appear for your benefit at no cost or obligation from you?
There's a fuel tax to pay for roads.
There's a property tax and a state income tax and a state sales tax to pay for education for children.
There's a state income tax and a state sales tax and tuition to pay for colleges.
There's a water bill from the water district every 2 months to pay for water.
There's a telephone bill and a special telephone tax to pay for phones, and an internet bill to pay for Internet.
There's an airline ticket tax to pay for air traffic control.
But the question was: what percentage of Apple's profits did the US government earn? Any thoughts on that?
Well based upon citizenship. If they don't like the duties that comes from citizenship then they can move away and renounce it.
They are trying to move away. That's what this article is about.
The companies manufacturing the generics will enjoy quite a boom.
And, since almost all of those generic drug companies are located overseas for tax purposes, they'll be able to keep most of the profits they earn without paying much in US taxes.
I never knew that nut farmers had such godlike powers.
It's called a telephone. You call up the bee supplier. He arrives with bees. Hives are setup near your crops. Bees pollinate. Later, the bee supplier picks up the hives and invoices you for the bee rental.
I wonder why they're not using those powers right now to bring the perfect amount of rain to California, though.
This is called irrigation.
You must think farmers just have big plots of land and food crops just randomly happen to grow there.
In this case, "these kinds of shenanigans" that have the politicians "looking the other way" are entirely within the rules. The companies are following the rules.
What percentage of Apple's profits did the US government earn?
Why should Pfizer "care about" the US? Does the US "care about" Pfizer?
Is there a basis for a mutually friendly relationship (or any other kind of "warm" or "good" relationship) between the US and Pfizer? If so, please explain what this relationship could be based on.
Seattle Times. Key phrase: "Inverted corporations must still pay U.S. taxes on the profits they earn in the U.S." But read the story for more info.
Also lmgtfy.
Pfizer makes 60% of it's revenue outside the US. Why should they pay US taxes on profits earned entirely outside the US? Other countries do not tax foreign profits the way the US does.
Obviously Pfizer doesn't think they should be subject to such an unfair system. They found a way out. They will still pay US tax on US profits.