Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Uhm... (Score 1) 497

Nonsense. Barack Obama, George W Bush, Bill Clinton, George HW Bush, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, and Richard Nixon all lied plenty but none - not even Nixon - have come out with as much nonsense as Donald Trump.

I always feel the most ardent Trump supporters don't understand what a false dichotomy is. Because they believed others have lied, they must that Trump is always telling the truth. No, Trump lies regularly but they won't admit it.

Comment Re:sorry, no (Score 1) 448

Because Apple DOES have a presence here in New Zealand,

You are asserting Apple has a presence merely because it does. You are also asserting that by not having any stores or employees or offices, Apple has a presence. That is illogical at best.

that is how they are able to sell into schools and to Government Departments, they MUST be registered in New Zealand as a business in order to get a Tax ID in order to collect/pay GST (sale taxes).

I don't know: Does Apple sell via 3rd party? Maybe you should find out first.

The volume of sales to schools (above $50,000) a year forces the issue.

Volume doesn't matter if Apple does not sell directly to schools. Again find out first before you make the assertion.

They will have a registered office (be it with an accountant/lawyer).

Then find the registration.

Colgate is registered in NZ as a company, how (or why) Budweiser gets here I don't know. But I DO know Apple is selling direct into New Zealand and must have a tax ID to be able to do so.

My question which you did not answer: Do you force upon Colgate and Budweiser the same provisions you wish to force upon Apple? If no, then you are biased.

Comment Re:sorry, no (Score 1) 448

You didn't answer the question: Apple has no employees, stores, offices, etc in New Zealand. Why should they have to pay any taxes for the things that you mentioned? Why don't you force Budwesier to pay for every time someone buys a Bud in New Zealand or Colgate for every tube of toothpaste? That's what the importer is supposed to do.

Comment Re:sorry, no (Score 1) 448

On that basis I should not have to pay taxes ether because the companies I spend my money with pay taxes and so do their employees.

What are you talking about? Apple uses zero resources of New Zealand as they have no offices, no employees, no stores there. So why should they have to pay any taxes? Every California company you do business with pays California taxes. Every Texas company you do business with pays Texas taxes; however you do not expect them to pay taxes in China unless they had infrastructure in China.

Apple has been collecting and paying GST on goods bought directly from them, if they were overseas they had (until the last 12 months) no obligation to do so.

The article specifically states the taxes go to Australia because that is the arrangement that was made with New Zealand. I'm sure many other corporations in New Zealand have the same structure. Are you going to demand they all pay taxes or are you just biased against Apple?

That indicates Apple has a taxable presence in New Zealand.

That's absurd logic. If I drink Tropicana juice in New Zealand, Tropicana has a taxable presence in New Zealand. If I buy a Bud Light in New Zealand, Budweiser has a taxable presence in New Zealand. By they way, if I extend that logic in reverse, you owe every single country in the world for taxes for everything you have ever bought.

Comment Re:sorry, no (Score 1) 448

Now Apple comes along, they are "outside" you country, then enjoy ALL the benefits of roads etc etc etc that you do, but they don't pay taxes, so in real terms they are $300,000 better off each year than you, money they can put in the bank for a rainy day.

How is Apple enjoying "ALL" the benefits that you are asserting? Apple has no stores, no employees, no offices, etc. in New Zealand. I'm not even sure that they import their products themselves into New Zealand and rely on other parties to do it. As far as they are concerned they get no benefits from New Zealand. Their partners are the ones that do; they are also the ones who are paying taxes.

Comment Re: Do security researchers trust those laptops? (Score 2) 82

Well no system is perfect and I think you as assuming those systems are never patched ever. From what I know about the contest, the software version is frozen for the contestants so it is not a moving target. In some cases the exploit might already be fixed in the most current version.

Comment Re:You missed the point. It's about relativity. (Score 1) 167

With Vista it wasn't just UI changes. Like most new versions of Windows, Vista had problems during the initial release with stability and driver support, etc. However, Vista development was troubled. Most companies didn't release new drivers partly because they didn't think MS would release it on time. Also the drivers infrastructure was so new.

Adding to Vista's problems was the artificially lowering of hardware requirements so that the lowest computer models could advertise that they were Vista Capable* (*meaning they could only run Vista Home Basic only) and more expensive models were Vista Ready. This led to consumer confusion with even a MS VP complaining that he had purchased a "$2,000 email machine" not knowing it could not really run Vista.

Comment Re:Not Buying It (Score 1) 109

You mean a company whose reputation is under intense criticism all the time like Apple would never patch holes they know about. Have you thought about what you just said? Granted Apple might not be the most best at finding holes or transparent about them; that does not mean they don't try to patch them when they find about them.

Comment Re: Newspeak is real (Score 1) 139

Unlike the US, the U.K. has a wider range of work eligibility permits. In the US, there is only the H1-B program for immigrants who are not green card holders.

The U.K. allows for foreign nationals to work on temporary permits recognizing that people need to earn a living while not expecting to stay in the U.K. forever. For example, student visas allow them to work. Certain travel visas not only allow people to work but also require that they travel for a certain percentage of their stay.

These visas also have other restrictions like the type of jobs that are allowed. Mainly these are jobs and not careers. For example you can be a short order cool in a restaurant; you can't be a chef. You can be a receptionist; you can't be a manager, and so on.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Only a brain-damaged operating system would support task switching and not make the simple next step of supporting multitasking." -- George McFry

Working...