By that logic, the richer US states should be able to close their borders to poorer states with lower wages and taxation. Otherwise you just get a race to the bottom.
And how can you say that NAFTA is a bad thing if it results in cheaper construction of ventilators?
It's not really lying though, and if people want to believe that the more money they spend the better they'll look, why not take it off them? You'd be able to put it to much better use.
But the headquaters are in the Cayman Islands, as well as all the profits and non-existent tax revenue. If they thought it would be better to employ hundreds of people in the Cayman Islands, they'd be doing so already.
Interestingly, other countries don't have these loopholes, yet they still have corporations and employment. I'm thinking this whole thing is just scare-mongering by the rich. "Don't make us pay taxes or we'll disappear and won't pay any taxes." Maybe it's time to call their bluff, and we'll see if they move their entire operation and their thousands of employees to Jersey or somewhere.
If your newspaper costs over a dollar a day then you're reading the wrong newspapers. And that $300 is every time your reader breaks or is stolen or you spill your coffee on it.
If they're going to tax something, it may as well be parasitic industries like advertising and search engines. It definitely helps that they're foreign so we're not damaging any of our own industries.
You'll find that prices across the globe would be very inflated if Intel managed to shut down all their competition. Thankfully there is a large economic block which isn't in the pocket of big business and can actually act in the interests of consumers.
Electricity is renewable. Lithium is used to store said electricity. What's the problem? I don't see what being foreign has to do with anything, unless you're an isolationist state with no global trade.
Any more of this socialist talk, and Bolivia won't be a democracy for very long, the US will install their own American-friendly dictator who'll understand the benefits of partnership with US mining corporations.
Then it'll move onto rendering more things on the screen, like games with ten thousand characters on screen at one time, all completely unique, and a landscape with infinite draw depth, nothing popping up but for instance a tree appearing as a single pixel on the horizon, getting closer and bigger until you have a photo-realistic microscopic view of the bark.
The problem there, is that it assumes the only things worth doing are those which return a direct financial profit. If it were up to private industry, we wouldn't even have GPS, or satellites at all. We wouldn't even be posting here as the Internet wouldn't exist, except maybe in a corporate crippled form.
I don't think human progress should be held back because Wall Street wants bigger dividends.
There are benefits to electronic voting, if it's done right. With hand voting you are guaranteed to have some error. The counting can be done quicker electronically (when done right).
What's the rush? Election results are generally known the morning after, and the new government won't take charge until a while after that. Do you really need to know the results immediately after the polls close?
With electronic voting, it is easier to make sure the ballots are valid. For example, look at this ballot from the recent Minnesota election. Did that person want to vote for Al Franken or for lizard people?
Neither, it's a spoiled paper and counts for nothing.
As long as there is a voter verified paper trail, it can work. Furthermore, it will be harder to rig the election, because not only will you have to rig the electronic box, you will also have to rig the paper ballots. If they come out unequal, there will be problems.
If you're having to count the paper ballots anyway, then there is no gain with an electronic system.
Fortuanately, voting scales pretty well. Countries are generally broken up into districts, wards or constituencies of a few thousand people where votes can be easily counted then returned.
Slashdot Mirror
Tea is taxed at 15%.
No different than making six figures from renting out property or share dividends. Either way, you're being paid for nothing.
By that logic, the richer US states should be able to close their borders to poorer states with lower wages and taxation. Otherwise you just get a race to the bottom.
And how can you say that NAFTA is a bad thing if it results in cheaper construction of ventilators?
It's not really lying though, and if people want to believe that the more money they spend the better they'll look, why not take it off them? You'd be able to put it to much better use.
But the headquaters are in the Cayman Islands, as well as all the profits and non-existent tax revenue. If they thought it would be better to employ hundreds of people in the Cayman Islands, they'd be doing so already.
Interestingly, other countries don't have these loopholes, yet they still have corporations and employment. I'm thinking this whole thing is just scare-mongering by the rich. "Don't make us pay taxes or we'll disappear and won't pay any taxes." Maybe it's time to call their bluff, and we'll see if they move their entire operation and their thousands of employees to Jersey or somewhere.
It's called 'inflation'.
If they did, then house prices would rise again accordingly.
If your newspaper costs over a dollar a day then you're reading the wrong newspapers. And that $300 is every time your reader breaks or is stolen or you spill your coffee on it.
If they're going to tax something, it may as well be parasitic industries like advertising and search engines. It definitely helps that they're foreign so we're not damaging any of our own industries.
Because phone Internet access is incredibly expensive compared to text messages. Japan isn't a good example, they love any expensive gimmick.
Europe does not have a single education system, and the voucher thing is in Sweden.
They'd need two million people uploading a video every day to make the site break even at that price.
Make your mind up, which one of these do you want?
How would they benefit by cutting off the influx of talent and ideas? And why would an Eastern country want to protect Western culture?
How do you know it was damaged by the airline rather than the airport?
I see the yankee tears are flowing already.
You'll find that prices across the globe would be very inflated if Intel managed to shut down all their competition. Thankfully there is a large economic block which isn't in the pocket of big business and can actually act in the interests of consumers.
The EU does not have the ability to raise or levy taxes. And they fine EU corporations too.
You're just one of those whiny Americans throwing a tantrum because your precious corporations can't ignore all the laws like they do at home.
Electricity is renewable. Lithium is used to store said electricity. What's the problem? I don't see what being foreign has to do with anything, unless you're an isolationist state with no global trade.
Any more of this socialist talk, and Bolivia won't be a democracy for very long, the US will install their own American-friendly dictator who'll understand the benefits of partnership with US mining corporations.
Who are these 5% who have all of Norway's oil money?
Then it'll move onto rendering more things on the screen, like games with ten thousand characters on screen at one time, all completely unique, and a landscape with infinite draw depth, nothing popping up but for instance a tree appearing as a single pixel on the horizon, getting closer and bigger until you have a photo-realistic microscopic view of the bark.
Considering your own ideology to be more important than the wellbeing of everyone else is the hallmark of libertarianism.
The problem there, is that it assumes the only things worth doing are those which return a direct financial profit. If it were up to private industry, we wouldn't even have GPS, or satellites at all. We wouldn't even be posting here as the Internet wouldn't exist, except maybe in a corporate crippled form.
I don't think human progress should be held back because Wall Street wants bigger dividends.
Why in a huge recession would you want to reduce economic activity by cutting spending?
What's the rush? Election results are generally known the morning after, and the new government won't take charge until a while after that. Do you really need to know the results immediately after the polls close?
Neither, it's a spoiled paper and counts for nothing.
If you're having to count the paper ballots anyway, then there is no gain with an electronic system.
Fortuanately, voting scales pretty well. Countries are generally broken up into districts, wards or constituencies of a few thousand people where votes can be easily counted then returned.