World Politics

[redtreviso]

Wikipedia edits

""Bachmann, who officially launched her campaign yesterday in Waterloo, Iowa, told a Fox News reporter that she was proud to be in the town where John Wayne was from, because she embodies his ideals. Unfortunately for her, it turns out that the actor John Wayne was not from Waterloo, but serial killer John Wayne Gacy was.

Shortly after the gaffe, the Wikipedia page for actor John Wayne was altered to change his birthplace from Winterset, Iowa to Waterloo, apparently as an effort to cover for the misguided politician.

Another edit came after she declared Tuesday morning that the nation's sixth president, John Quincy Adams, was a "founding father," even though he was just a child when his father, the nation's second president, signed the Declaration of Independence.

Sure enough, in short order Adams's Wikipedia entry was changed to call him a "founding father." The page's administrator quickly struck down the revision, insisting that users not make edits "based on current events."""

 

[Anonymous]

It is a misdirect.. a lie

Let me help you.

Definition of SPECIFIC
1
a : constituting or falling into a specifiable category b : sharing or being those properties of something that allow it to be referred to a particular category
2
a : restricted to a particular individual, situation, relation, or effect <a disease specific to horses> b : exerting a distinctive influence (as on a body part or a disease) <specific antibodies>
3
: free from ambiguity : accurate <a specific statement of faith>

Definition of Willful Ignorance

(idiomatic, law) A bad faith decision to avoid becoming informed about something so as to avoid having to make undesirable decisions that such information might prompt. It may also be shown as for a person to have no clue in a decision but still goes ahead in their decision.

So am I lying or is it the IRS? It's their data.

 

[redtreviso]

Let me help you.






So am I lying or is it the IRS? It's their data.

I'm sure it is not you.. Heritage or Cato is your cause d' poodle on this.
Like I've said all along.. If this was NOT A LIE, then the whole subject would be insignificant....

 

[Anonymous]

I'm sure it is not you.. Heritage or Cato is your cause d' poodle on this.
Like I've said all along.. If this was NOT A LIE, then the whole subject would be insignificant....

Hmmm. The links are posted and they are neither Heritage nor Cato. They are IRS. The data is there. Look for yourself, unless of course you already have and you

just


can't


face


it.

In which case willful ignorance pretty well sums you up.

Being lied to is a betch. I get it. But being stuck on stupid is no way to go through life.

 

[redtreviso]

Hmmm. The links are posted and they are neither Heritage nor Cato. They are IRS. The data is there. Look for yourself, unless of course you already have and

just


can't


face


it.

In which case willful ignorance pretty well sums you up.

Being lied to is a betch. I get it. But being stuck on stupid is no way to go through life.

Everyone here knows better scott.. Your selective evidence is not the reality.

 

[redtreviso]

""CHEYENNE/ATLANTA - The secretive business havens of Cyprus and the Cayman Islands face a potent rival: Cheyenne, Wyoming. At a single address in this sleepy city of 60,000 people, more than 2,000 companies are registered. The building, 2710 Thomes Avenue, isn't a shimmering skyscraper filled with A-list corporations. It's a 1,700-square-foot brick house with a manicured lawn, a few blocks from the State Capitol.

Neighbors say they see little activity there besides regular mail deliveries and a woman who steps outside for smoke breaks. Inside, however, the walls of the main room are covered floor to ceiling with numbered mailboxes labeled as corporate "suites." A bulky copy machine sits in the kitchen. In the living room, a woman in a headset answers calls and sorts bushels of mail.

A Reuters investigation has found the house at 2710 Thomes Avenue serves as a little Cayman Island on the Great Plains. It is the headquarters for Wyoming Corporate Services, a business-incorporation specialist that establishes firms which can be used as "shell" companies, paper entities able to hide assets. Wyoming Corporate Services will help clients create a company, and more: set up a bank account for it; add a lawyer as a corporate director to invoke attorney-client privilege; even appoint stand-in directors and officers as high as CEO.

Among its offerings is a variety of shell known as a "shelf" company, which comes with years of regulatory filings behind it, lending a greater feeling of solidity. "A corporation is a legal person created by state statute that can be used as a fall guy, a servant, a good friend or a decoy," the company's website boasts. "A person you control... yet cannot be held accountable for its actions. Imagine the possibilities!"
""

http://news.yahoo.com/special-report-little-house-secrets-great-plains-113759191.html

 

[Anonymous]

Everyone here knows better scott.. Your selective evidence is not the reality.

MY selective evidence? WTF are you on about? It's the DATA from the Internal Revenue Service. Why don't you stop with the platitudes and address the data? Are you even capable of that?

Like always, the data is either correct (which is my bet) or it is incorrect. So why is the IRS trying to blow smoke up your backside Red??? I'm dying to know.

All anecdotal fairy-tale's aside....

Everyone here knows better scott

no Red, you look at facts and they don't fit with your view and you are TOO EFFING LAZY to consider an alternative.

It's pathetic but very unsurprising. I'd imagine your copy of rules for radicals is pretty tattered by now.

You are just so predictable. You accuse me of lying when you lie.... always the same, right out of the playbook.

 

[redtreviso]

MY selective evidence? WTF are you on about? It's the DATA from the Internal Revenue Service. Why don't you stop with the platitudes and address the data? Are you even capable of that?

Like always, the data is either correct (which is my bet) or it is incorrect. So why is the IRS trying to blow smoke up your backside Red??? I'm dying to know.

All anecdotal fairy-tale's aside.... no Red, you look at facts and they don't fit with your view and you are TOO EFFING LAZY to consider an alternative.

It's pathetic but very unsurprising. I'd imagine your copy of rules for radicals is pretty tattered by now.

You are just so predictable. You accuse me of lying when you lie.... always the same, right out of the playbook.

That's because you are a liar.. You might consider it a symptom too and do something about it.

 

[Anonymous]

That's because you are a liar.. You might consider it a symptom too and do something about it.

I guess I'll have to take this as your final answer.

I just can't decide if you are a coward or just not very bright. A combination of both I suppose.

At any rate, you have a nice evening.

 

[patricknd]

That's because it takes him a long time to find a particular location on a map.

kudos on the improved spelling of late. i knew you could do it if only you'd apply yourself.

and by the way, your thanks aren't necessary. i like to be helpful.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Scott - You and I often seem to have a different thread going that you and the others, and sometimes we react accordingly. But sticking with the issues topic, I will comment:

Reduce corporate tax to 15%. Place our corporate tax rate amongst the lowest in the world and attract business from all corners wanting to tap the American workforce.

Tie the cut to investment in US employees, and I'll go even lower than 15%.

Replace the tax code entirely. Eliminate all personal deductions. Flat Federal tax of 10% of income over a threshold combined with a national sales tax or just eliminate Federal Tax and just go with a NST or VAT.

I don't favor such a tax in general, though do agree on eliminating (nearly) all deductions. I'd like to see a primary residence and education to some degree deductible. But you didn't specify the threshold and that may be a key to changing my opinion. One potential advantage of a flat tax, or NST or VAT is that it's harder to corrupt.

Eliminate the war on drugs.

Agree, with some rules. In your own home, I don't care what you do. Especially weed. Be selling it to kids, driving, etc. and you get huge fines, jail, and lots of community service. Hard drugs (meth, crack, heroin), I don't know about legalizing. Too many problems with addiction. But we already have heaps of people in chronic pain on vicodin, oxycodone, and other addictive opiates. But weed should absolutely be legalized, and taxed. Plus we can start growing hemp at the same time and using it for all sorts of things.

All of the above energy policy.

We agree almost entirely on energy. Though I would probably rather fast track than you, and make more use of government investment to do so. I may want to drill for less gas and oil than you, but in the short term see the necessity for it.

Eliminate payroll taxes permanently. As in forever. Employers should be encouraged to hire not taxed for hiring.

Wow! I did not expect you to say that! While this could create a huge budget hole, it would likely be one of the most effective ways to get people working in the private sector and the workers would take home more money. Of course it would have to be offset with some other tax, such as a VAT, but it would create jobs and move money.

Disagree with you in that I think the highest percentage should pay more taxes, or be compelled to donate more. I also favor public education more than you, as discussed before.

I like your idea of making investment capital available to (very) small business. Ultimately it will be the hundreds of thousands of small time entrepreneurs that will provide the backbone of our economy.

This is one of those issues, like lobby reform, where 99% of the people who hear it, agree with it and think it's a great idea, no matter what their political persuasion or level of understanding. It just simply makes sense. And yet, it's not on the radar screen for either political party.

I think it's time to consider a balanced budget amendment.

Should have probably implemented it back when Bob Dole, Daniel Patrick Moynihan and the others came a whisker from passing it. Right now, there's too much of a mess and too many people hurting. But I do agree at some point it should be passed.

Our completely corrupt election campaign process should be cleaned up. No pay to play. Like you, no lobbying in Washington DC. If I have an issue as a business owner or individual then I can discuss my concerns with my representative.... but not as a group buying favor, public unions included.

Agree. Campaign finance reform applies to all. Private individuals, corporations, unions, all of them, everyone. As I said before, lobbyists can still speak to politicians, they just have to do it in open forums, such as town hall meetings with the rest of the population standing around.

I'm war weary.

Who isn't? This you must agree was a huge mistake of Bush. A colossal blunder born from neoconservative ideology. I'm reminded of the aforementioned Moynihan who (though a Democrat) was friends with Nixon, and cautioned Nixon about LBJ's war, that if he didn't seize the opportunity to end it, and end it soon, it would become his war. Well, that's what it did. And that's what Iraq and Afghanistan are turning into for Obama. He seems to want to have it both ways with his pulling out nearly the same amount of troops he himself put in, while hoping it placates the people, and ignores the cost. And it may end up biting him in the rear.

 

[ChrisE]

Reduce corporate tax to 15%. Place our corporate tax rate amongst the lowest in the world and attract business from all corners wanting to tap the American workforce.

LOL. If the corporate tax rate was zero, would that be enough to offset the lower labor rate in 3rd world countries? How good is supply side if nobody has money to buy your goods? Does the American workforce work for $10 a day? Its all bs.

This is where clowns like Scott lose their bearings. I expect a real gym in response to this.

 

[Anonymous]

LOL. If the corporate tax rate was zero, would that be enough to offset the lower labor rate in 3rd world countries? How good is supply side if nobody has money to buy your goods? Does the American workforce work for $10 a day? Its all bs.

This is where clowns like Scott lose their bearings. I expect a real gym in response to this.

Don't you ever tire of sucking up to Rhubroma? It's embarrassing.

If the smartest President ever to grace our republic were to announce even a temporary corporate tax rate reduction to the low teens he would have a Trillion dollars in repatriated money brought back to the US literally overnight. If the most intelligent President ever to set foot in the Oval Office were to make those corporate tax reductions permanent he would shortly find corporations from across the globe setting up shop here to tap a very productive workforce.

Low raw cost of labor is not the only consideration, Chris. Output or productivity may be much more important than wage and benefits.

Ever wonder why tech companies like Cisco don't have a huge prescence in sub-saharan Africa?

And finally, being called a clown by a fool makes me, uh, LOL.

 

[Bala Verde]

Interesting article on the presumed benefits of corporate tax holidays

http://seekingalpha.com/article/277183-the-real-per-share-effect-of-a-corporate-tax-holiday

And if you don't like lobbying, you probably don't like CSCO, who are purposefully gaming the system to pay even less taxes than they already do (which puts them in the 17.5% instead of the "high 35%"):

Now Cisco, the largest maker of networking equipment, wants to save even more -- by asking Congress to waive most federal taxes due when multinationals bring such offshore earnings home. Chief Executive Officer John T. Chambers has led the charge for the tax holiday, which would be the second since 2004. He says it would encourage companies to “repatriate” as much as $1 trillion held abroad, spur domestic investment and create jobs.

So first they complain about a high corporate tax rate, which "forces them to shift their income/operations abroad" and which effectively lowers their tax rate. Then they lobby hard to further reduce existing corporate rates and create hundred of loopholes, lowering their effective tax rate to 17.5%. And whne that's not enough they push for a corporate tax holiday, because that would "benefit the US economy" and they are charitable organizations who are concerned about the welfare of the US people.

How many people is that money going to put to work? No one knows, because CSCO is not in the business of hiring people, but of making profits (for their shareholders) in the first place. Less spending = higher profit margin.

U.S. companies used $312 billion they repatriated under a 2004 tax holiday largely for stock repurchases, while doing little direct hiring or domestic investment, according to a paper in the current issue of the Journal of Finance by professors at the University of Illinois, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. It was the latest in a series of studies that reached similar conclusions.

And as a comparison, the US rates are far from being "disproportionate":

That beats the income-tax rates in many countries where Cisco has sales: Germany’s combined national-local rate is 30.2 percent; France’s 34.4 percent; Japan’s 39.5 percent and the U.K.’s 26 percent, according to figures from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...win-most-gaming-1-trillion-u-s-tax-break.html

 

[redtreviso]

Interesting article on the presumed benefits of corporate tax holidays

http://seekingalpha.com/article/277183-the-real-per-share-effect-of-a-corporate-tax-holiday

And if you don't like lobbying, you probably don't like CSCO, who are purposefully gaming the system to pay even less taxes than they already do (which puts them in the 17.5% instead of the "high 35%"):



So first they complain about a high corporate tax rate, which "forces them to shift their income/operations abroad" and which effectively lowers their tax rate. Then they lobby hard to further reduce existing corporate rates and create hundred of loopholes, lowering their effective tax rate to 17.5%. And whne that's not enough they push for a corporate tax holiday, because that would "benefit the US economy" and they are charitable organizations who are concerned about the welfare of the US people.

How many people is that money going to put to work? No one knows, because CSCO is not in the business of hiring people, but of making profits (for their shareholders) in the first place. Less spending = higher profit margin.



And as a comparison, the US rates are far from being "disproportionate":



http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...win-most-gaming-1-trillion-u-s-tax-break.html

shhhhh... you might cause scotty to drink

 

[Anonymous]

Interesting article on the presumed benefits of corporate tax holidays

http://seekingalpha.com/article/277183-the-real-per-share-effect-of-a-corporate-tax-holiday

And if you don't like lobbying, you probably don't like CSCO, who are purposefully gaming the system to pay even less taxes than they already do (which puts them in the 17.5% instead of the "high 35%"):



So first they complain about a high corporate tax rate, which "forces them to shift their income/operations abroad" and which effectively lowers their tax rate. Then they lobby hard to further reduce existing corporate rates and create hundred of loopholes, lowering their effective tax rate to 17.5%. And whne that's not enough they push for a corporate tax holiday, because that would "benefit the US economy" and they are charitable organizations who are concerned about the welfare of the US people.

How many people is that money going to put to work? No one knows, because CSCO is not in the business of hiring people, but of making profits (for their shareholders) in the first place. Less spending = higher profit margin.



And as a comparison, the US rates are far from being "disproportionate":



http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...win-most-gaming-1-trillion-u-s-tax-break.html

Bala, the good news in all of this is that this government will do nothing so we don't have to worry about what to do with as much as an estimated 3 trillion American corporations are not going to bring back home and what the proper tax rate should be. There was an interesting 60 minutes piece on this topic. I posted a link a while back.

As far as the US rate being disproportionate or not look no further than behavior. I'm sure John Chambers and Cisco see exactly zero benefit from headquartering in Switzerland. None whatsoever.

If the corporate rate were to be reduced to 15% and 1 Trillion were to be repatriated the tax revenue would be 150 billion.... a little more than half of the country's deficit in February.

All that aside, what's your solutions?

 

[redtreviso]

Bala, the good news in all of this is that this government will do nothing so we don't have to worry about what to do with as much as an estimated 3 trillion American corporations are not going to bring back home and what the proper tax rate should be. There was an interesting 60 minutes piece on this topic. I posted a link a while back.

As far as the US rate being disproportionate or not look no further than behavior. I'm sure John Chambers and Cisco see exactly zero benefit from headquartering in Switzerland. None whatsoever.

If the corporate rate were to be reduced to 15% and 1 Trillion were to be repatriated the tax revenue would be 150 billion.... a little more than half of the country's deficit in February.

All that aside, what's your solutions?

All the CISCOs are just waiting to be all moral and do the right thing. but the govment is forcing them to put greed above all else. Those poor put upon babies..

 

[Bala Verde]

Bala, the good news in all of this is that this government will do nothing so we don't have to worry about what to do with as much as an estimated 3 trillion American corporations are not going to bring back home and what the proper tax rate should be. There was an interesting 60 minutes piece on this topic. I posted a link a while back.

As far as the US rate being disproportionate or not look no further than behavior. I'm sure John Chambers and Cisco see exactly zero benefit from headquartering in Switzerland. None whatsoever.

If the corporate rate were to be reduced to 15% and 1 Trillion were to be repatriated the tax revenue would be 150 billion.... a little more than half of the country's deficit in February.

All that aside, what's your solutions?

Do you really think that they have their (regional) HQs in Switzerland or the Netherlands, because the tax rate is lower there compared to the US? I don't believe for a second that they would respond to a lower US corporate tax rate by moving operations from Switzerland to the US. They are in Switzerland, or the Netherlands, as opposed to France, or Germany. Not the USA. They need to have a foothold in Europe, so the US corporate tax rate is not going to change that.

In addition, companies rarely ever only look at the corporate tax rate only, they look at the whole package, 1) infrastructure (general as in the country's financial infrastructure, to physical roads, waterways and railroads) 2) level of education 3) markets 4) taxes etc. 5) regulation 6) rule of law

If taxes were their only concern, they would probably be in Somaliland.

Even if they were to move all their operations from Europe to the US, they are not going to bring back many jobs. It's not in Switzerland or the Netherlands where large quantities of cheap labor assembly workers are soldering together transistors. A couple of lawyers, accountants, and some clerks, and if you are lucky IT people who have not yet been outsourced to India. (No disrespect intended to India).

Secondly, to reemphasize, reduction in corporate tax rates does not automatically translate into jobs.

In the post-recession "recession" (?) stock prices have gone up, earnings are up, cash is up, growth is up, and yet, few are hiring... Productivity is up too, meaning, fewer people producing more.

If you want job creation, the US, or any other Western country, needs to focus on what it does better than other countries. That is education. Provide your population with good higher education, so companies can actually hire well educated people whose jobs cannot be easily shipped abroad (which will alway remain a rpoblem in a globalized world. At the moment you see many 'clerk' or paralegal level law jobs disappear overseas as well) The highest unemployment rate is amongst the least educated. Do you think CSCO will start hiring them like crazy with more cash at their disposal? No, because in China, or Vietnam they can produce their stuff at a far lower price. Heck, they might actually use that extra income to re-organizetheir organization so that it becomes more efficient, and automate (read: cut jobs) many processes.

How often have we heard about CSCO lobbying Congress to improve math, physic, chem etc education? They use their efforts towards lowering tax rates instead. I think that's short sighted.

I will look at the cbs link, can you post again?

 

[Anonymous]

Do you really think that they have their (regional) HQs in Switzerland or the Netherlands, because the tax rate is lower there compared to the US? I don't believe for a second that they would respond to a lower US corporate tax rate by moving operations from Switzerland to the US. They are in Switzerland, or the Netherlands, as opposed to France, or Germany. Not the USA. They need to have a foothold in Europe, so the US corporate tax rate is not going to change that.

In addition, companies rarely ever only look at the corporate tax rate only, they look at the whole package, 1) infrastructure (general as in the country's financial infrastructure, to physical roads, waterways and railroads) 2) level of education 3) markets 4) taxes etc. 5) regulation 6) rule of law

If taxes were their only concern, they would probably be in Somaliland.

Even if they were to move all their operations from Europe to the US, they are not going to bring back many jobs. It's not in Switzerland or the Netherlands where large quantities of cheap labor assembly workers are soldering together transistors. A couple of lawyers, accountants, and some clerks, and if you are lucky IT people who have not yet been outsourced to India. (No disrespect intended to India).

Secondly, to reemphasize, reduction in corporate tax rates does not automatically translate into jobs.

In the post-recession "recession" (?) stock prices have gone up, earnings are up, cash is up, growth is up, and yet, few are hiring... Productivity is up too, meaning, fewer people producing more.

If you want job creation, the US, or any other Western country, needs to focus on what it does better than other countries. That is education. Provide your population with good higher education, so companies can actually hire well educated people whose jobs cannot be easily shipped abroad (which will alway remain a rpoblem in a globalized world. At the moment you see many 'clerk' or paralegal level law jobs disappear overseas as well) The highest unemployment rate is amongst the least educated. Do you think CSCO will start hiring them like crazy with more cash at their disposal? No, because in China, or Vietnam they can produce their stuff at a far lower price. Heck, they might actually use that extra income to re-organizetheir organization so that it becomes more efficient, and automate (read: cut jobs) many processes.

How often have we heard about CSCO lobbying Congress to improve math, physic, chem etc education? They use their efforts towards lowering tax rates instead. I think that's short sighted.

I will look at the cbs link, can you post again?

D

o you really think that they have their (regional) HQs in Switzerland or the Netherlands, because the tax rate is lower there compared to the US?

Yes, it's a tax strategy so they are not forced to pay US corporate rates for earnings made outside of the US on top of taxes paid to the country where the profit was earned.

I don't believe for a second that they would respond to a lower US corporate tax rate by moving operations from Switzerland to the US.

I take guys like Chambers at their word. You don't.

In addition, companies rarely ever only look at the corporate tax rate only, they look at the whole package, 1) infrastructure (general as in the country's financial infrastructure, to physical roads, waterways and railroads) 2) level of education 3) markets 4) taxes etc. 5) regulation 6) rule of law

If taxes were their only concern, they would probably be in Somaliland.

I agree 100%, which is why comments about only one element of labor (cost of) don't tell much of the story and are just uninformed babble.

If you want job creation, the US, or any other Western country, needs to focus on what it does better than other countries.

We have the most productive labor force in the world. That is why we would still be able to attract major corporations (if we were competitive with tax & regulatory structure) from all over the world to our shores. Huge market combined with an extremely productive labor pool is very, very attractive.

Productivity is up too, meaning, fewer people producing more.

Exactly. It's attractive to any business to have very productive employees. Remember, the global economy is not a zero-sum game. If we had a competitive package more companies would not only come home, but would come here.

Heck, they might actually use that extra income to re-organizetheir organization so that it becomes more efficient, and automate (read: cut jobs) many processes.

You might want to re-think this comment. Automation will happen and as it does it will create other opportunities. Think of the entire tech industry, or what became of the buggy-whip manufacturers.

How often have we heard about CSCO lobbying Congress to improve math, physic, chem etc education? They use their efforts towards lowering tax rates instead. I think that's short sighted.

Is it Cisco's responsibility to to educate our kids?? Are they not paying a pretty penny back for this (among other things)? I can promise you any education system Chambers would be responsible for would run circles around what we have today. Why should a corporate CEO feel the need to lobby congress to improve something like PUBLIC education? Should politicians not do something about the state of education in and of their own volition? Isn't this one of their primary responsibilities? Do we not have multitudes of Federal agencies to administer to our kids educational need?
http://www.ed.gov/

The 60 minutes piece;
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7360932n&tag=contentMain;contentBody

 

[Ninety5rpm]

All the CISCOs are just waiting to be all moral and do the right thing. but the govment is forcing them to put greed above all else. Those poor put upon babies..

No, not "greed" (which implies coveting unearned wealth). They're putting corporate interests, or the shareholders' interests, if you will, first, as intelligently as they can. Just like you, presumably, for your own sake and for those you care about, put your interests first, as intelligently as you can. I mean, if you're married, and you're not putting your interests first, I would advise your spouse to divorce you. It would by unworkable (not to mention hypocritical) for you to expect, much less demand, anything else of anyone else, individual or corporation.

They're putting their interests first, given the world as it is. Of course, as they should. As we all should. With relatively high corporate taxes here, it's in their interest to pay the costs of headquartering an American company in Switzerland. If we end corporate taxes, it will be in their interest to stop doing that.

It is that simple. And it is good.

 

[Anonymous]

No, not "greed" (which implies coveting unearned wealth). They're putting corporate interests, or the shareholders' interests, if you will, first, as intelligently as they can. Just like you, presumably, for your own sake and for those you care about, put your interests first, as intelligently as you can. I mean, if you're married, and you're not putting your interests first, I would advise your spouse to divorce you. It would by unworkable (not to mention hypocritical) for you to expect, much less demand, anything else of anyone else, individual or corporation.

They're putting their interests first, given the world as it is. Of course, as they should. As we all should. With relatively high corporate taxes here, it's in their interest to pay the costs of headquartering an American company in Switzerland. If we end corporate taxes, it will be in their interest to stop doing that.

It is that simple. And it is good.

You are correct.

You must understand though, government is Redtreviso's religion. Cisco should give everything earned to the higher power (government).

 

[rhubroma]

D

...
I agree 100%, which is why comments about only one element of labor (cost of) don't tell much of the story and are just uninformed babble...

This is a deliberately misleading conclusion, because while not every corporation establishes itself where the labor is not merely affordable, but cheap, depending on the product and market strategies, you conveniently forgot to mention in your agenda-ed analysis that many do and have: from Union Carbide in India, to a host of manufacturing companies in South Asia, while Mercedes-Benz has set up a base in Alabama for the same reason.

Imagine, in Alabama for goodness sake.

 

[redtreviso]

You are correct.

You must understand though, government is Redtreviso's religion. Cisco should give everything earned to the higher power (government).

Cisco thrived on american investment..It like you prospers because of our system not in spite of it.

 

[Anonymous]

Cisco thrived on american investment..It like you prospers because of our system not in spite of it.

Cisco thrives on world-wide consumption of their network hardware and software applications.

The investment you speak of is private securities. Cisco has an obligation to those shareholders to provide value. It would be very difficult for Cisco to provide real value if they deliberately paid billions more in taxes than they were otherwise obligated to.

How many millions of US workers have fractional shares of Cisco via mutual funds in the various retirement plans?

 

[redtreviso]

Cisco thrives on world-wide consumption of their network hardware and software applications.

The investment you speak of is private securities. Cisco has an obligation to those shareholders to provide value. It would be very difficult for Cisco to provide real value if they deliberately paid billions more in taxes than they were otherwise obligated to.

How many millions of US workers have fractional shares of Cisco via mutual funds in the various retirement plans?

The United States of America provided CISCO with the environment to become what they are..American income bought their stocks..built the new road between them and sun and apple. CSCO is a THING not some godlike super being to be worshiped.

coo cooo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xf14lkyH2dM