The New York Times is shocked that Apple seeks to minimize its liability under California’s exorbitant tax rates by moving profits to lower taxing states and countries. The paper melodramatically suggests in a front page “expose” today that the economic woes of a local community college, attended in the early 1970s by Apple founder Steve Wozniak, are directly related to Apple’s stinginess.
I wonder if Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., and other Times executives employ tax attorneys for their personal finances or for those of the paper. And if Apple paid more taxes in California, how much would reach the classrooms of Cupertino’s De Anza College, as opposed to bankrolling the thousands of diversity bureaucrats throughout the state’s university and college systems, not to mention funding astronomical public employee union benefits or bloated
government agencies and their ineffective social uplift programs.
The Times can’t contemplate that the solution to tax avoidance is to lower taxes and reduce the magnitude of government spending. It’s too bad that the titans of Silicon Valley don’t have the guts to speak out about the economic realities that drive business decisions.
It’s too bad that the titans of Silicon Valley don’t have the guts to speak out about the economic realities that drive business decisions.
A lot of those guys are hypocrites (or at least are very good at compartmentalizing). They want to spend as much of our money as they can, but want to spend as little of theirs as possible.
OT: I wonder if the dearth of commenters at SR lately is due to the Word Press Registration/Login requirement that was apparently introduced (w/o fanfare) when this website was recently reformatted. At any rate, as I eventually figured out, the right hand tab “Meta” is where you go to register.
California problems are related to prop 13 property taxes are lower than let’s say Texas but icnome state and some other taxes are higher. Liberals were right Prop 13 shifted taxes elsewhere, unfortunatley changing prop is hard since many middle and elderly benefit from it more. No conservatives mention that Prop 13 changed the tax structure.
This post is a classic example of the “waste, fraud and abuse” fallacy: point out a concededly ridiculous example of government spending (diversity bureaucrats)and use it to suggest that you can balance the budget by eliminating such wasteful spending, as opposed to raising revenue or making less politically popular spending cuts.