> No, that's the same. Using your brain to legally reduce your tax bill is quite reasonable and we all do it. If you have a problem with how much taxes presumab

> No, that's the same. Using your brain to legally reduce your tax bill is quite reasonable and we all do it. If you have a problem with how much taxes presumably Amazon, not Jeff, pays, take it up with your lawmakers. Bending and modifying the law because you can exactly because you amassed money in order to amass more money isn't smart, it is literally the equivalent of the rich kid buying power in a pay to win game. > That's a pretty uncharitable characterization of Amazon. I can make an economics argument that to have a company of 1.6 trillion dollars in value means it probably brought more than that much in value to people around the world. But it doesn't really matter, he didn't do it to make the world a better place. I wasn't thinking just of amazon at the time, but also apple. I could make a political science argument as to why Apple/Amazon/big corp not enforcing standards on sweatshops only enables further exploitation of people.