8 ms·
I'm really sick of articles like this. Amazon or $insertCompany that isn't paying taxes didn't do _anything_ illegal. Don't hate the player, hate the game. If s
by latencyloser 8y ago
I'm really sick of articles like this. Amazon or $insertCompany that isn't paying taxes didn't do _anything_ illegal. Don't hate the player, hate the game. If shit like this bothers you, write your local representatives and ask them to change it.
- ceejayoz 8y agoConvincing people the game sucks sometimes requires specific examples of individual players everyone recognizes. For example, cycling's doping scandals are well illustrated by Lance Armstrong.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- pfortuny 8y agoThe question is not legality it is morality. And the moral actor is not Amazon but its governing body (consejo de administración in Spanish sorry).
- jimktrains2 8y agoI don't think anyone questions the legality of it. Articles like this are intended to convince people that the current system is unfair and to write their representatives and senators, even if they don't state that specifically.
- slantyyz 8y ago>> Articles like this are intended to convince people that the current system is unfair and to write their representatives and senators, even if they don't state that specifically. The problem is that if you don't state it clearly and specifically, that message will be lost on most people, and they'll still redirect their anger at the company as opposed to the actual source of the problem.
- chc 8y agoThis article repeatedly calls out "Congress" and "Trump" as the major responsible parties. I don't see how that could be conveyed much more clearly.
- qudat 8y ago> to write their representatives and senators Do you have references to any articles that evaluate the efficacy of this? It seems like an effort in futility to me.
- reallydude 8y agoits been effective on niche policy issues within states, but at the federal level the representatives simply lie about what they have "heard" from constituents.
- ravenstine 8y agoI doubt many people would pass up a "pay no taxes this year" card if they were given one.
- Scriptor 8y agoMost people do not have the resources to lobby for that sort of tax system. Amazon, and other corporations, do.
- qudat 8y agoLobbying is not the problem, the problem is the system that allows itself to be lobbied.
- tivert 8y ago> Lobbying is not the problem, the problem is the system that allows itself to be lobbied. The problem is both. It is a problem that people lobby for selfish policies that ignore the needs of others, and it is a problem that the system sometimes listens to them.
- diminoten 8y agoYeah, because Amazon was around in early 20th century...
- xienze 8y ago> Most people do not have the resources to lobby for that sort of tax system. EVERY argument about what is "morally right" w.r.t. paying taxes is a matter of perspective. To you, what Amazon is doing is immoral. To someone worse off than you, what you do routinely on your taxes (deducting mortgage interest, student loan interest, etc.) is immoral.
- nradov 8y agoMany people pay zero income taxes. And individuals can also carry forward certain losses from previous years, just like Amazon and other corporations.
- SonicSoul 8y agothe purpose of journalism is to expose "the game" so that people can write their local representatives and ask them to change it.
- derefr 8y agoIf most people just come away resenting Amazon and not "the game", has journalism done its job?
- antiutopian 8y agoAnd what power does a local representative have over Jeff Bezos? He is willing to threaten to leave whole cities over small tax increases on his company. Capital represents a lot more power than local government!
- Diederich 8y ago> If shit like this bothers you It does. > write your local representatives and ask them to change it. Done and done. Here's the problem: my voice, plus the voices of all of those who agree, have far less of an impact on the beahviour of the politicians than Amazon does.
- qudat 8y agoYes it does suck how corrupted people become when they wield power. It almost puts into question the entire idea of a representative democracy.
- cr0sh 8y ago> the entire idea of a representative democracy I think the problem is that our politicians, by and large, don't really represent us. That is, the "template" if you will, of a politician, tends to not fit what the general average person is. For instance - how many politicians are middle class? I'd wager that none of them are, for even if they were prior to being elected, after they are elected they would get a salary that is much larger than a standard middle-class salary. Instead - our representatives (mainly federal - state level is a different story, but there are analogies) all are of the "wealthy class" - not the middle class, which is kinda who you would expect to represent everyone (that is, the "average"). Note that I am speaking from a US-centric perspective, but I bet it's the same elsewhere. So why do we keep electing the same template of people to the same positions, and expect a real change? I don't know. Part of it may be the whole "temporarily embarrassed millionaire" thing. Part of it may be corruption once they get into power (that is, why would a middle-class person, upon obtaining a much larger salary that bumps them out of middle class and into wealthy - change that?). This is really the heart of the matter; it isn't that our representatives only represent companies, but rather that they don't represent us (that is, the average American) period - as people we can really relate to, that they can relate to - because of the wealth discrepancy. And it's not likely to ever change; I can't think of a way to do it that doesn't involve violence - and even if it did happen, how do you keep it from changing back (what incentivizes people to continue to stay representative of the people they represent)?
- wil421 8y agoIt’s acticles like this one that will raise awareness of the issue. Doesn’t matter if the issue is illegal or not. The article clearly states one of the proposed beneifts of the corporate tax cut was better corporate citizenship. Jeff Bezos is the worlds richest person of course people will be writing about Amazon.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- dhowingjwkd 8y agoA lack of prosecution does not necessarily mean that the conduct is legal. It could mean that we have deficient prosecution.
- EpicEng 8y agoOk so which illegal acts are they committing exactly?
- kevin_b_er 8y agoWe do indeed have a deficient prosecution. The Republican Party has been slashing the budget of the IRS to investigate tax dodging and malfeasance. The Republican Party campaigns on eliminating the IRS.
- NegativeK 8y agoWhy in the world should we tolerate people or companies acting badly just because they can?
- __jal 8y agoIs the claim that journalists should only write about crime? Are articles (assuming they meet your aesthetic criteria otherwise) allowed to mention anyone who does things in line with prevailing legal policy, yet might be problematic? I, personally, am really sick of reflexive whining when the media dare be critical of certain firms.
- brucemoose 8y agoMeanwhile those who control companies with virtually limitless resources successfully lobby against changes wanted by individuals. It's unethical, and unfair. Sickening articles like this are necessary to raise awareness about how imbalanced the system is.
- tivert 8y ago> I'm really sick of articles like this...If shit like this bothers you, write your local representatives and ask them to change it. Articles like this are the reason why people write their representatives. Your comment is a subtle exhortation to do absolutely nothing about the tax policies that lead to results like this.
- skh 8y agoAmazon and other companies actively lobby to write tax laws the way they are. Amazon's voice, money, power far exceeds mine. It isn't a level playing field. In addition to voting and contacting my representatives I comment on articles like this one. My actions aren't limited to just the two you mentioned. It bothers me how rigged the system is and I'm vocal about it. Regulatory capture is a nice phrase from economics. What we have in the U.S. (and elsewhere) is tax law capture.
- diminoten 8y agoLobbying is not some magical salve you rub on every problem to make the laws say whatever you want. The reality is it's more convenient to pretend you have no power because then it excuses your inaction. Firstly, prove Amazon, specifically, lobbied for the tax law they're benefiting from here. Let's start with that.
- skh 8y agoLobbying is not some magical salve you rub on every problem to make the laws say whatever you want. Of course it's not magical. It's money. No magic needed. Amazon spent a lot of money and effort to lobby against allowing states to tax internet sales. Then when it got big enough it lobbied for them because at their scale it became a competitive advantage against small players to have everyone charge sales taxes on internet orders. Amazon lobbies for tax break where they build warehouses and other buildings. The reality is it's more convenient to pretend you have no power because then it excuses your inaction. The reality is that I have very little power in comparison to Amazon. This is not disputable. I do have some power. Just nowhere near the amount of power that Amazon has. Firstly, prove Amazon, specifically, lobbied for the tax law they're benefiting from here. Let's start with that. I trust your Google skills. I trust your common sense too on this matter.
- diminoten 8y agoMy google skills turned up absolutely nothing, and my common sense tells me that you're incorrectly applying a "corporations is bad" heuristic. What'll be fun is trying to watch you prove Amazon lobbied for a law that's older than it is.
- kevin_b_er 8y agoThose laws were done because the companies corrupted our representatives. I hold both responsible.
- anth_anm 8y agoYou're sick of articles like this? Your post makes me want to smash everything around me.