Oletros

51 ms·

511.
by Oletros 10y ago
> Doesn't every financial aid distort the competition, by design? What am I missing. If the financial aid is given to every company in the country there is no distortion.
512.
by Oletros 10y ago
> Yet here it is, telling Ireland to charge Apple "back taxes" against its will. This has nothing to do with the tax system > Of course it can. And in fact it must, because tax is not an EU competency. Of course it cannot, b
513.
by Oletros 10y ago
No, a company is not being punished. What the ruling does is fixing an ilegal advantage given to a company
514.
by Oletros 10y ago
VAT is a consumption tax, what is deducte is corporate profit taxes
515.
by Oletros 10y ago
> , if they win, Apple would be taxed twice, once on the money that their holding company has in Ireland and again once that money is brought over to the US. This is not true, the taxes paid in the EU are deducted from the 35% TAX that h
516.
by Oletros 10y ago
Theere is no nullification of any tax law and there is no retroactivity in this case And, like in all the other case about ilegal state aids, the EU can go back 10 years since the start of the investigation
517.
by Oletros 10y ago
> Low tax member states like Ireland have been under political assault for decades and this is the latest attempt to redress something the EU has no power over The ruling explicitly says that there is no problem with Irish tax system if
518.
by Oletros 10y ago
> It's not one company. It's one example. Pretending this is only about Apple, while completely ignoring the implications to other MNCs, is precisely what Ireland can't afford to do Can you point another company that has a
519.
by Oletros 10y ago
No law was changed
520.
by Oletros 10y ago
> The understanding is that if we taxed more, they'd move somewhere else and we'd actually receive less. e.g., biting the hand that feeds you. This case is not about Ireland taxing more or less the companies, it is about a swe
521.
by Oletros 10y ago
> Then they decide they want to 'change the law retroactively 25 years back' [1] - this is gong-show Chavista banana republic type property theft. Apple should sue them aggressively. Taking into account that there was no change
522.
by Oletros 10y ago
> Apple basically played by the rules. Nothing they did was illegal until the EU change their laws 25 years retroactively. No law has been changed, the article cited in the ruling has its beginning in the Treaty of Rome of 1957
523.
by Oletros 10y ago
Which personal attacks? It is just a logical conclusion reading your comment history.
524.
by Oletros 10y ago
He seems to be in a Crusade against Google.
525.
by Oletros 10y ago
Can you give us some sources for your claim that speciation has not been demostrated to be caused by natural selection? > I've read about so far is merely demonstrating adaptation of the species as opposed to a new species emergin Y
526.
by Oletros 10y ago
Are you aware that nothing of what you said had nothing to do with this case?
527.
by Oletros 10y ago
> - Bookmark syncing and continuity (opening tabs from any of your other devices) Is it not the same with Chrome?
528.
by Oletros 10y ago
And Apple argument is wrong
529.
by Oletros 10y ago
Just the pictures, there is no diameters, measures, etc
530.
by Oletros 10y ago
In both cases, the only claim is: > 1. The ornamental design of an electronic device, as shown and described.
531.
by Oletros 10y ago
And I have a 2010 MBA and I hear it every day.
532.
by Oletros 10y ago
Tell that to my MBA late 2010 since Maverick
533.
by Oletros 10y ago
For example, http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/cold_fusion_08 But I think my claim has more to do with Rossi's E-Cat than with the original P&F experiments
534.
by Oletros 10y ago
> I was struck by the viciousness of attacks against Fleischmann and Pons in the months after their cold fusion announcement. A few physicists even went out of their way to call them frauds and charlatans -- it wasn't enough to say
535.
by Oletros 10y ago
The rumors about leaving was for Jawbone I think
536.
by Oletros 10y ago
> The term is called "sell-through" and Apple is one of the few tech companies to use sell-through. It means units actually sold to customers. So no, there is no trick. Sell-through is a percentage of units sold to customers re
537.
by Oletros 10y ago
It will make a difference in the damages
538.
by Oletros 10y ago
> The Government asked him to not sell his product, Well, the Government didn't that, they asked proof that it was safe before selling it https://es.scribd.com/document/329218929/2016-10-27-Special-...
539.
by Oletros 10y ago
Ninjaed by LukeB Here there is a discussion about the github repo https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13073331
540.
by Oletros 10y ago
> To be fair, this could have nothing to do with the quality of the project To be fair, looking at the code, it has all to do with the quality of the project

More ›