3 ms·
That's a kind of "corporate social responsibility" that excludes the underpaid schmucks who work in the factories, and the cities they live in. I find that revo
by Arnt 8y ago
That's a kind of "corporate social responsibility" that excludes the underpaid schmucks who work in the factories, and the cities they live in. I find that revolting.
- coldtea 8y ago>I find that revolting That's because you have a job as it currently stands. If your job (and especially your whole sector) had gone abroad, you'd find the outsourcing PLUS tax evasion revolting. And as you'd be scrapping to pay the rent you'd wouldn't find particularly comforting that some consumer goods would be cheaper make this way... That said, who said anything about the people "who work in the factories"? Strawman much? The tax Apple saves from not paying it to the US isn't going to those "schmucks" (sic), so whether those people should be paid more (which I'm all for) is orthogonal to whether Apple should pay more taxes in the US instead of looking for legal loopholes Let's see companies keep their "corporate social responsibility" to their own societies and countries first -- which they don't --, and we can talk about them "improving the world" at large afterwards...
- undersuit 8y agoI don't think anyone said that China can't tax the US company Apple for making products in China.