5 ms·

That’s quite the claim. Got anything to back it up? Pretty easy really. Multiply the cost of unemployment benefits * number of company employees in that countr

by gaius 8y ago

That’s quite the claim. Got anything to back it up? Pretty easy really. Multiply the cost of unemployment benefits * number of company employees in that country. Then look at the tax evaded by the company. "You do the math". JSA in the UK is £73/week, or £3796/year. Let's say a company dodges £1Bn/year in taxes. How many people would they need to employ before the country breaks even?

Bantros 8y ago
It really is that easy folks
- 7000skeletons 8y ago
  "TECH GIANTS HATE HIM."
antidesitter 8y ago
Uh, what? Stop being vague and describe exactly what you mean. Response to edit: Please describe the full calculation (with factual numbers) of "national wealth", and then we'll talk.
- gaius 8y ago
  LOL if you wish to disprove me do your own research! But I'll give you a hint, if tax evasion was good for a country, why would that country have taxes at all...?
  - antidesitter 8y ago
    > LOL if you wish to disprove me do your own research! That's not how burden of proof works. You made the claim that "the country would literally be better off if those people were unemployed!", so prove it. > But I'll give you a hint, if tax evasion was good for a country, why would that country have taxes at all...? A "hint" is not what's required here.
amarant 8y ago
nah, replace unemployment benefits with the summed salaries of the employees, since it's probably fair to assume employees spend most of their salaries in the country where they live. also, you seem to imply a scenario where the company is kicked out of the country. That does not recoup any taxmoney to the state. It also likely doesn't make the infrastructure cheaper to maintain or any less desired, so the correct equation is just that you'd loose whatever taxes they do pay (surely they don't dodge all of them),and the sum of the salaries of their employees, plus whatever service the company provides, and you gain nothing. "you do the math" edit: missing "don't"
kodablah 8y ago
Where does the tax paid by the company come in to play? And the tax paid by their employees? The real math is total company paid tax + total employee tax - societal costs of presence. That's rarely less than 0 and surely not less than the negative societal costs of unemployment if they, as you mention, are better off unemployed. The folly so many keep making is they think every tax dollar is necessary to support every company present. That type of thinking makes even one cent of avoidance appear to be a net negative, when amount paid overall can still be a net positive compared to impact of presence.

by gaius 8y ago

Bantros 8y ago

It really is that easy folks

7000skeletons 8y ago
"TECH GIANTS HATE HIM."

antidesitter 8y ago

Uh, what? Stop being vague and describe exactly what you mean. Response to edit: Please describe the full calculation (with factual numbers) of "national wealth", and then we'll talk.

gaius 8y ago
LOL if you wish to disprove me do your own research! But I'll give you a hint, if tax evasion was good for a country, why would that country have taxes at all...?
- antidesitter 8y ago
  > LOL if you wish to disprove me do your own research! That's not how burden of proof works. You made the claim that "the country would literally be better off if those people were unemployed!", so prove it. > But I'll give you a hint, if tax evasion was good for a country, why would that country have taxes at all...? A "hint" is not what's required here.

amarant 8y ago

nah, replace unemployment benefits with the summed salaries of the employees, since it's probably fair to assume employees spend most of their salaries in the country where they live. also, you seem to imply a scenario where the company is kicked out of the country. That does not recoup any taxmoney to the state. It also likely doesn't make the infrastructure cheaper to maintain or any less desired, so the correct equation is just that you'd loose whatever taxes they do pay (surely they don't dodge all of them),and the sum of the salaries of their employees, plus whatever service the company provides, and you gain nothing. "you do the math" edit: missing "don't"

kodablah 8y ago

Where does the tax paid by the company come in to play? And the tax paid by their employees? The real math is total company paid tax + total employee tax - societal costs of presence. That's rarely less than 0 and surely not less than the negative societal costs of unemployment if they, as you mention, are better off unemployed. The folly so many keep making is they think every tax dollar is necessary to support every company present. That type of thinking makes even one cent of avoidance appear to be a net negative, when amount paid overall can still be a net positive compared to impact of presence.