No, not all companies do it. Most companies in fact don't do it. Only those who are big enough to afford to do it get to do it. The rest of them are stuck paying more (comparative to their earnings) than all of the successful companies.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
I'd prefer a world where we as a society demanded that everyone follow the spirit of the law and publicly punished those who refused to. I realise we don't live in such a world, but I'm not going to say "I don't see the problem" for people doing the legal thing rather than the moral thing.
What do you mean by "legally obligated to pay"?
Do you mean that you declare all of the tax deductions that you can without having to provide evidence? For example in Australia you can declare traveling expenses up to X dollars without having to provide any proof whatsoever (expenses over X dollars require that you keep receipts in the event that your audited). would be paying the exact same amount even if I didn't use it for work purposes.
Now legally your not allowed to declare those traveling expenses without actually incurring them. However there is 0 chance you'll get caught because the tax man doesn't require you to provide proof as long as you remain below a certain threshold. So do you consider lying about those tax deductions to be "legal"? Is refusing to lie about them "paying more than your legally obligated to pay"?
What about expenses that you claim are for work? For example I'm required to have a working internet connection so that I can provide remote assistance in the event an emergency happens. Now I could try to claim that my internet connection is therefore a work expense, except the truth is that I would have that internet connection no matter what and I could just walk 10 minutes down the road and actually enter the building physically to deal with any issues. Morally my wage is not impacted by using my internet connection for work. Legally, I might be able to get away with claiming a percentage for tax purposes.
I suffer from major depression. When I go off my mess I feel like crap. I stop being able to concentrate and I feel overwhelming hopelessness. On the wrong medication I was failing basic courses at uni. On the right medication I got credit/distinctions on average and have not only held down a job for 3 years but excelled at it.
I have gone off my medication in the past because I wasn't convinced that the problem was chemical rather than environmental. When I go off my medication I'm sometimes fine for months. But eventually things get worse. I've been on the same medication for 4 years now, I've yet to have any issues.
I explored several options before settling on medication. Even then I explored the possibility that the depression was environmental or situational. I've been proven wrong each time.
Are some people incorrectly medicated? Definitely. But the idea no-one needs this medication to live a fulfilling life is reckless and ill informed.
the Us's firsts and oldest ally, btw.
If only the English language between the USA's first and oldest ally.
What's the difference between a dead american and a living one? It's much easier to get along with the dead one.
How grubby are facebook employees? I've had maybe five broken keyboards in the past 3 years. One of them was from a spilled drink onto the keyboard. That's 0.3 people a year due to a spilled drink. Now sure, we only have 250 staff. So let's assume facebook has 30,0000 staff. That's 40 keyboards a year. I can't believe these vending machines are cheaper then ordering 40 keyboards a year.
Just how messy are facebook employees to need enough keyboards due to coffee spills? Is it an American thing?
I imagine many American businesses would give China their business on the basis that China shoots strikers. It's one way to keep strikes to a minimum.
So will they wake any sleeping passengers as well? Of course not. This argument makes no sense whatsoever based on the behaviour of the flight crew.
Too bad for you we're going to continue to read books. Not once has the crew asked me not to do that.
That's why I been saying we should call them black fellas. It clears up a whole lotta confusion
I'm happy to buy DRM'd products (as long as they're reasonable. Unreasonable DRM such as requiring I always be online is going too far). I'll also happily download un-DRM'd copies of the games should my bought copy ever stop working.
I feel this is ethical as I am supporting the company while ensuring I gain the entertainment I desire.
If games are priced reasonably (in Australia I can get Mass Effect 3 for $79 for the PC. That might seem unreasonable to Americans, but in Australia $100 and below has been the standard price for years) I'm happy to buy the original. If they're unreasonable ($120+) I'll look for used copies.
I've all but given up on consoles for 2 reasons. 1) I find it much easier to play modern games with a keyboard and mouse. This isn't the main reason though. I had initially given up on games completely before I discovered I could play them on PCs. The main reason is (2) I'm tired of the upgrade games Sony keeps playing. The PS2 was a worthy investment as it could play my PS1 games. The original PS3 was a worthy investment because it could play my PS1 and PS2 games. It's doubtful the PS4 will had backwards compatibility (based on the PS3 life-cycle) and so I'm getting off this roller-coaster while I'm still ahead.
Also making legally owned backups of games that are playable on a PS4 will be quite difficult and even possibly illegal.
Can you point to an FAA regulation mandating my book not be in my hands? Because without that this is something the airline enforces, and I've never seen an airline enforce it for a book (iPad, yes. Book, no).
You romantic son of a gun,
Don't forget Agent 88