As long as questioning the settled science remains "Here's some interesting data that doesn't seem to fit the models. What do you make of this?" and not "The models violate my personal view of the universe and must be untrue." you are absolutely right.
I use to be a Sr. Network Engineer in 2000 for Amazon. I could only drink the Kool-Aid for about a year. Then went on to work with smaller companies and burned out on that. Worked almost 2 years installing DirecTV, I was 2 stone lighter on that job. Then ran around as a service tech fixing strip mall stores and big box stores... go tired of all the driving.
Now, at 53, I'm working for a medium size aerospace firm and learning MS. We got bought out by the French and will be switching to Zodiac and having to renumber the whole shop. I'm getting paid half of what I got at Amazon, but much better healthcare. I have a very short commute and love the people that I work with. My job title is SysAdmin, but really it's network engineering, facilities, plumbing, help desk, electrician, cable monkey, and AV club. I love the verity and am very happy.
Look for a smaller place where all the little things you've learned over the years come in handy.
See, people are too stupid to realize a bus with 60 people that gets defunded means there are now 60 more cars crammed onto the same failed underfunded highway infrastructure.
A 5 percent reduction in transit funding results in a 30 percent increase in traffic congestion and a 25-50 percent increase in commute times.
Only if you have a pretty odd ethical code, IMHO.
No, it's pretty sound. Pay some taxes but not more than is reasonable.
Why does that strike a moral pang in your heart?
If the taxes were 100% of all earnings would you claim they should be paid?
There obviously is some value for which taxes are too high. It's too grey a line to claim anyone is crossing it unless they pay zero, and sometimes not even then (but, Apple does not pay zero taxes anywhere).
Some of us believe that corporations (like citizens) should have an ethical obligation to pay tax to the country they use the infrastructure of.
Apple does pay taxes in every country. They pay taxes in the U.S. They pay taxes in Australia. They pay taxes in Ireland. They just move where some of the income is declared in a way that the countries involved agree is correct. So how is Apple shorting Australia when they pay more in taxes than they consume in services?
In any worldwide company, it can make a lot of sense to shift where income is declared. If a device is assembled in a different country with parts made by still other countries, why does it make sense that 100% of the profit from every device sold in Australia is declared in Australia?
IMHO, this is as unethical as using the WIFI connection of your 80-year old neighbor cause she didn't know how to set up the security correctly.
That's unethical because you are literally stealing from her bandwidth cap, outbound connection speed, and potentially getting her in trouble if you are using any illegal torrents. But Apple is stealing from no-one. If even the Australia tax people don't think Apple is, what gives YOU the right to claim Apple is stealing just by shifting where some income is declared?
I was going to say something similar; it makes a lot of sense to take advantage of his skill in educating people on technical topics. That's the angle I would use to try and find a job, because if nothing else the job would be more interesting than the average help desk or entry level IT job.
I wouldn't call that being bitter. It's being realistic, especially for IT staff who are more prone than most to sudden cuts (and woe to he who is least senior at the company).
Really it's a positive message that shows a way out - contract.
You mean like the WHO saying people should consume no more than 10 percent of their calories in sugar - which is why people become diabetic in the first place?
Never happen. You want cures for things you're going to keep doing.
And you wonder why our societies are hollowing out?
Look, the Rich don't pay taxes like you and me.
Well, actually, it's just you. I use a lot of the things I learned from tax lawyers and tax accountants running a large estate so that I pay about what Bill Gates pays.
Stop subsidizing them. They won't love you more and they won't change their investments in your favor.
Seems this could expose the employer to other liabilities. How about if the employee was looking up something online that exposed he/she had a medical issue the employer wasn't aware of, or was in-the-closet.
Employee gets fired for other reasons, finds out employer was sniffing his/her email and/or searches, sues for wrongful dismissal and discrimination.
If I could hatch and execute a plan like this, you can bet that I would set my sights on a prize a little bigger than a few 400 dollar iPads.
however it seems that you are saying that apple has no assets in the country that would need protecting...
I did not say that at all. I said, does Apple's share o fthe assets in Aus. really cost more than $8 million AUS to protect or otherwise assist. I really doubt that it does. That's how much Apple is paying in taxes, so it seems reasonable to me.
There are plenty of companies that actually have their own facilities in China (and elsewhere) and I assure you that doing that costs FAR more than what Apple pays to "inspect" their suppliers.
Name one. You work for one of the slavers.
Apple sending over a few inspectors
It's a lot more than a few, and it's constant. AND it's published. Where can I look at Emerson's reports? Thought so.
The old stupid saw that all taxes are just wasted money.
What's more stupid is to realize how true it's become.
Taxes are useful - up to a point. But we long ago crossed the point where they are NOT useful, they are just feeding large political systems that produce nothing of value. Schools are suffering not from lack of money, but lack of people who care or have to care.
Have you seen the size of the US debt?
Yes, made far worse by large bloated government organizations that spend 2x whatever you give them. Raising taxes will only INCREASE debt the way the current system is organized. I know you can't see that, you remain so willfully ignorant to the reality of what money and power do - but that is the truth.
I'll let you have the last response since this is not a debate, just you laying out the groundwork for having to disclaim any connection with your Slashdot userID in years to come...
What I want to know is why isn't Apple liable for US taxes here?
They are, they pay a lot of U.S. taxes.
If I leave the country and go work in another one, all money I make is still taxable by the US federal government
No, only after a certain amount (almost $100k) is it taxable.
He talks about social responsibility but he only means it if someone else has to pay for it.
No, Apple pays plenty (far more than any other company) for monitoring and reports on suppliers, for bonus to overseas workers that only Apple gives, for higher labor costs because they will not allow workers to be over-worked.
What does not make any sense is to pour MORE money into a giant engine of inefficiency that just wastes it. Why would anyone but a handful of government workers be better off if Apple paid more taxes? Instead Apple is in fact putting that money to good use in bringing production to the U.S. and other worker quality of life improvements - again, benefits to workers that every other company is utterly ignoring.