I'm fascinated. How are you both sufficiently educated that you can actually type a comment online and yet simultaneously not understand how easy it is to enter a bar and not drink alcohol?
Forget designated drivers, what about people that want social interaction, fancy coffee with a friend that wants a beer, feel like a game of pool, like the way a bar does a burger?
Shit, I go into bars 2-3 times a week and I've had alcohol on one day in the past five months.
It is time to get rid of these stupid life ruining laws and do something that will actually work.
You mentioned tests, but I'm not aware of anything that'll work immediately with zero effort by an idiot and have no false positives.
"I had a drink, I'd better not drive" is pathetically easy and guaranteed to work. It does have false positives though so I agree, lets find something better.
Until then, the DUI laws aren't the worse compromise at the 'whole population' level.
Backups over WiFi that are bottlenecked by my NAS disk write speed are worth the investment in 802.11ac.
Downloading from the net at the same time and simultaneously watching a HD movie streaming to my TV without hitting WiFi bandwidth constraints is something I don't even think about.
It's good, I benefit from it supporting way higher throughput than my WAN connection and it's also nice knowing it supports the full 160Mbps I get over WAN too.
As for Kenya, I could describe numerous other occasions in which Britain has made poor decisions. I'm not in denial, unlike half the people in this conversation.
I go to a web site, I send it a request - GET/content In return, it sends me a html page that includes
- the content that I was hoping to see
- links to additional content in which i might be interested
- links to additional content in which I am not interested
As I know that adverts fall into that last category, I opt not to follow those links or download that content.
Seems to me that I'm fully complying with the site's expectations, and saving the bandwidth of the people providing content that I would ignore. Shit, I'm doing these guys a favour here.
I'm not sure why you think this means I should touch shit?
My own numbers were fucking made up, or did you miss that part?
If you read another poster on this discussion he highlights that transfer pricing is an even lower percentage of revenue than my guess - this year.
I stand by my statement that over a period of multiple years, Facebook is acting dishonestly, exploiting a legal loophole and paying less tax in the UK than is reasonable or should be expected.
Anything else you'd like me to admit, or are you going to make further claims that the Facebook IP (not charged out of the US, incidentally) is worth more than the fucking revenue it generates?
Reasonable levels of transfer pricing are legitimate and valid costs of doing business, and the Facebook brand and website are sensible cross-charge items.
Running the UK operation at a permanent loss makes no sense whatsoever, doesn't sound reasonable or realistic, and is an accounting fiddle to avoid tax.
Stop pretending otherwise, and stop making stupid claims like "stealing from Americans" because you're losing the argument. Just fucking admit you're wrong and just fucking admit you're a twat, because it's pretty self-evident to everybody else.
You may not call those bribes, but tell me what $10,000 dollars handed to a candidate is for if it isn't to unduly influence them to deliver benefits to the donator?
But we all know you are just making this up
I do apologise for quoting Facebook's own fucking public report.
Now, perhaps you'd care to apologise in return for being such an ignorant cock?
Nothing 'cheap' about avoiding 5000x4 cups of coffee a day. Even at 10p per cup, that's getting close to half a million pounds a year. That's a sizeable chunk of cash.
"Following this unethical and immoral approach, we can avoid paying a reasonable sum to the country that provides us with a safe and profitable operating environment".
You call it legal, I call it Bad and UNFAIR. Bitch all you like, I'm still going to call out the multinationals that exploit the system and bribe politicians to try and prevent them closing the loopholes.
What the fuck makes you think that Facebook paid out that money as a tax strategy?
They paid out that money because employing people in London is fucking expensive.
They'd have paid fuck all corporation tax if they were based in Grimsby and didn't pay a fucking bonus at all. The issues is their tax avoidance practices. The bonus figure merely acts as a media friendly way of highlighting just how much cash is sloshing around their UK business.
I'd be quite comfortable with my employees politely inquiring if their colleagues' cars are charged and whether it would be possible to use the charger.
It takes less time than a smoking break or a coffee break or a game of foosball and leads to happier employees and a respectful workplace.
Slashdot Mirror
No, the fuckwit that put it on your steering wheel.
Ever considered watching the fucking road and surrounding environment while driving?
then why is is even legal to have a bar with a parking lot for the patrons to come in?
So that people with a fucking brain don't have to park elsewhere.
Clearly you don't qualify.
I'm fascinated. How are you both sufficiently educated that you can actually type a comment online and yet simultaneously not understand how easy it is to enter a bar and not drink alcohol?
Forget designated drivers, what about people that want social interaction, fancy coffee with a friend that wants a beer, feel like a game of pool, like the way a bar does a burger?
Shit, I go into bars 2-3 times a week and I've had alcohol on one day in the past five months.
Alcohol has an effect on reflexes from about 0.02. Some even say your judgement starts getting impaired at this level.
My understanding is that alcohol has a beneficial effect on reflexes before it inverts.
Hitting (and staying at) that narrow positive level could be tricky of course.
It is time to get rid of these stupid life ruining laws and do something that will actually work.
You mentioned tests, but I'm not aware of anything that'll work immediately with zero effort by an idiot and have no false positives.
"I had a drink, I'd better not drive" is pathetically easy and guaranteed to work. It does have false positives though so I agree, lets find something better.
Until then, the DUI laws aren't the worse compromise at the 'whole population' level.
Or you could just skip the fucking wine if you're going to be driving.
Is sobriety that much of a burden for just one night?
Backups over WiFi that are bottlenecked by my NAS disk write speed are worth the investment in 802.11ac.
Downloading from the net at the same time and simultaneously watching a HD movie streaming to my TV without hitting WiFi bandwidth constraints is something I don't even think about.
It's good, I benefit from it supporting way higher throughput than my WAN connection and it's also nice knowing it supports the full 160Mbps I get over WAN too.
Your nationalist naÃveté is comical. You appear think that conducting military operations without heavy loss of life to your own force is a bad thing.
As for Kenya, I could describe numerous other occasions in which Britain has made poor decisions. I'm not in denial, unlike half the people in this conversation.
My Mercedes SLK happily does 400 miles on a tank. My BMW 1 series did. My Vauxhall did. Both Citroens did. The previous Vauxhall did.
That's with fast driving. Other than one of the Citroens it was trivial to get 500 miles out of all of them. No fun though.
350 miles is pretty shite.
I go to a web site, I send it a request - GET /content
In return, it sends me a html page that includes
- the content that I was hoping to see
- links to additional content in which i might be interested
- links to additional content in which I am not interested
As I know that adverts fall into that last category, I opt not to follow those links or download that content.
Seems to me that I'm fully complying with the site's expectations, and saving the bandwidth of the people providing content that I would ignore. Shit, I'm doing these guys a favour here.
I'm not sure why you think this means I should touch shit?
Forgive me if I am unimpressed with the swiss about this.
Yeah, damn those watch-making chocolate eaters. They should've invaded Ecuador or something.
Wait, what?
still considered the world's fairest justice systems
How anybody could describe the US justice system as justice, let alone fair, escapes me.
My own numbers were fucking made up, or did you miss that part?
If you read another poster on this discussion he highlights that transfer pricing is an even lower percentage of revenue than my guess - this year.
I stand by my statement that over a period of multiple years, Facebook is acting dishonestly, exploiting a legal loophole and paying less tax in the UK than is reasonable or should be expected.
Anything else you'd like me to admit, or are you going to make further claims that the Facebook IP (not charged out of the US, incidentally) is worth more than the fucking revenue it generates?
Reasonable levels of transfer pricing are legitimate and valid costs of doing business, and the Facebook brand and website are sensible cross-charge items.
Running the UK operation at a permanent loss makes no sense whatsoever, doesn't sound reasonable or realistic, and is an accounting fiddle to avoid tax.
Stop pretending otherwise, and stop making stupid claims like "stealing from Americans" because you're losing the argument. Just fucking admit you're wrong and just fucking admit you're a twat, because it's pretty self-evident to everybody else.
I didn't name any multinationals, but since you ask:
https://fbnewsroomus.files.wor...
You may not call those bribes, but tell me what $10,000 dollars handed to a candidate is for if it isn't to unduly influence them to deliver benefits to the donator?
But we all know you are just making this up
I do apologise for quoting Facebook's own fucking public report.
Now, perhaps you'd care to apologise in return for being such an ignorant cock?
Nothing 'cheap' about avoiding 5000x4 cups of coffee a day. Even at 10p per cup, that's getting close to half a million pounds a year. That's a sizeable chunk of cash.
Decent coffee costs more than 10p/cup.
"Following this unethical and immoral approach, we can avoid paying a reasonable sum to the country that provides us with a safe and profitable operating environment".
You call it legal, I call it Bad and UNFAIR. Bitch all you like, I'm still going to call out the multinationals that exploit the system and bribe politicians to try and prevent them closing the loopholes.
What the fuck makes you think that Facebook paid out that money as a tax strategy?
They paid out that money because employing people in London is fucking expensive.
They'd have paid fuck all corporation tax if they were based in Grimsby and didn't pay a fucking bonus at all. The issues is their tax avoidance practices. The bonus figure merely acts as a media friendly way of highlighting just how much cash is sloshing around their UK business.
Are you a total fuckwit?
Revenue: £105m
Salaries/bonuses: £35m
Other costs: £70m
Profit: £20k
Tax paid on profit: £4k
The fact that employees also pay tax on their salaries is totally fucking irrelevant.
Now lets explore that £70m in 'Other costs':
Legitimate business expenses: £40m
Fucked in transfer pricing to avoid tax commitments: £30m
Tax that should be paid: x% of £30m ~= £6m
So Facebook are £6m better off using these made up numbers without touching their employees' pay, or impacting on the tax earned from that pay.
Now do you get it, or do you persist in being ignorant?
What, 400 miles when driven fast, 500 miles when driving more cautiously?
Nice, I didn't realise they were at that level already.
It is like starting to charge for coffee
Only one out of six employers I've had in the UK didn't charge for coffee, if you don't include instant coffee and a kettle. I don't.
I'd be quite comfortable with my employees politely inquiring if their colleagues' cars are charged and whether it would be possible to use the charger.
It takes less time than a smoking break or a coffee break or a game of foosball and leads to happier employees and a respectful workplace.
Unplugging is only possible once charging has finished.
This sounds unlikely. There are too many scenarios in which charging may never finish.
If you provide inadequate seating you may lose custom and go out of business.
If you provide inadequate parking you cause problems on the street, for other nearby businesses and for any nearby residents.
So the public harm is prevented. The harm to your business is your decision.
More of a management game really.
I do recall these sorts of games being available as source code in books and magazines - it was stuff like this that taught me to code.