Dan Wasserman by Dan Wasserman

Dan Wasserman

Recommended

Comments (10) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. parkerfields

    parkerfields GoComics PRO Member said, 11 months ago

    You could replace “Apple” with any politician in the USA, or any corporation in the USA that is running its business wisely, and it would be the same. Apparently in the eyes of the liberal, making wise and sound business decisions with your own money is evil. But yet they think that making foolish decisions with other people’s (or tax payer’s) money is the thing to do.

  2. Chillbilly

    Chillbilly said, 11 months ago

    What Apple is doing is technically legal.


    I suppose the only thing stopping the average joe from avoiding taxes like this is their lack of 13,000 accountants, 10,000 lawyers and 500 lobbyists.

  3. Rad-ish

    Rad-ish GoComics PRO Member said, 11 months ago

    The only reason to put money in offshore accounts, like Mitt did, is to avoid paying taxes.

  4. ReasonsVentriloquist

    ReasonsVentriloquist said, 11 months ago

    Two words Elion Musk.
    .
    If AAPL had repatrioted those billions and paid the (less than) 35% on those dollars, then reinvested those dollars into an electric car company then maybe the stock of that company would have gone from $20 in 2010 to $90 in 2013.
    .
    So, to “save” 20% (because 15% is more in line with what those other nations charge and that’s 20% less than the 35% charged here), AAPL has had $1.6B dollars earning bupkiss in Tbonds. Meanwhile, Tesla Motors has a 250% rate of return or about 75% annual compounded rate of return!
    .
    Apple shareholders ought to be FURIOUS with Apple for that. As should IBM share holders with IBM’s constant usage of profits to buy back shares instead of driving innovation!
    .
    Whenever you make investment decisions based on the taxes alone, you are making a mistake!

  5. ReasonsVentriloquist

    ReasonsVentriloquist said, 11 months ago

    “Repatrioted” works too! I’m TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY, I’d like these companies that we created to pay their share too.
    .
    OH, What’s that? We didn’t have anything to do with their success? What other nation’s military was it that funded the invention of the internet? What do you say there John Chambers? What would CSCO be doing if not for the US Taxpayer.
    .
    What other nation was it that subsidised the schools so that there were scientists to work in Bell Labs to create the transistor (which is the evolutionary leap that has lead to the entire digital revolution.)?
    .
    Oh and which country does Apple whine to about its patent portfolio? Why can they whine? Because we have a robust patent Office! Why? Because we spent the money to make it so. We passed the laws to protect patents! How many cases do you think you would win if judges were paid by private industry (all, if you were the guy paying!)? But they’re not, they’re paid for with TAXES!
    .
    Apple, which other country was it that spent millions of dollars combatting your mortal enemy as he was trying to monopolize you out of the business (MSFT)? And which countries threat of further justice department muscle was it that encouraged Bill Gates and MSFT to make a $100Million investment in AAPL when you were on the balls of your AAP! If only to keep you around so that MSFT didn’t become a regulated monolopy?
    .
    These companies are not shy to ask for help from the American taxpayer; but they don’t want to become one!
    .
    So CSCO. How’s your stock doing? You have all those hundreds of billions of dollars you won’t repatriate… Your stock plain old stinks! It’s been $20 give or take for an entire decade!
    .
    Elion Musk is going to become the next George Westinghouse! And John Chambers is going to get kicked out of Cisco!

  6. Gresch

    Gresch GoComics PRO Member said, 11 months ago

    After buying the votes of the 47% the DEMS need
    everybody’s’ money to keep paying them off….

  7. pirate227

    pirate227 said, 11 months ago

    Apple maps was never that good and even an updated version wouldn’t be.

  8. Tigger

    Tigger GoComics PRO Member said, 11 months ago

    Add GE to the mix

  9. ReasonsVentriloquist

    ReasonsVentriloquist said, 11 months ago

    @Tigger

    This is certainly true.
    .
    Here’s this… I was talking to a small business owner the other day and (he is a Fox News devotee) he’s saying the usual stuff about how small business is the backbone of this nation and how taxes are blah blah (keep in mind that I am a small businessman as well) And I say to him…“Well, if I’m honest, the truth is that when you see what my revenues are and you see what I pay in taxes… I mean I write off a whole lot against the business…”
    .
    To which he responds, “Oh YEAH! I run EVERYTHING through the business… If I can show income of only $40,000/ year, I’m good with that.”
    .
    Point being here’s a guy whining about taxes while the actual rate that he pays is mid single digits! As opposed to if based off revenue minus legitimate business expenses only, his nominal rate would be 28% or so (Keeping in mind that nominal rate means that his net rate would be in the 15% area if you divided Taxes owed by total income – which is after the business expenses )
    .
    Of course this is the same guy who rales against “Obama care” and “Unions” while his wife is a union teacher that gets their Health Insurance Premiums paid for by the district (and he admits that without it, his business would probably be working for someone else because he wouldn’t have been able to afford to establish his business if he had to pay for Health Insurance too.)
    .
    We are on the same side. The only true difference is who we see as the other side.
    You see it as “Liberals” and “Government”.
    I see it as “Multi National Corporations.” They are the ones who are trying to have the “freedom” to ruin whatever life stands in their way.
    .
    “Conservatives” don’t bother me. I agree with many of their goals. I just think they are running in the opposite direction of those goals, cheered on by those that want them NOT to achieve those goals.

  10. ReasonsVentriloquist

    ReasonsVentriloquist said, 11 months ago

    First, please learn to make a link. It’s really easy
    (that link goes to the Pat Buchanan site.)
    .
    Now as to Mr. Buchanan’s piece.
    .
    I’ll give it this, Not taxing corporation wouldn’t have a significant impact on treasury income. Because Multinational corporations are slimeballz that put their money deep into the pockets of their management.
    .
    To cite ex Senator and two time 3rd AND 9th grader, Porn Movie investor Phil Graham whoes Graham, Leith, Bliley law showed us just what happens when you deregulate corporations, on his idea to detax corporations is insane!
    .
    What Mr. B lauds Mr. G for is his selective understanding of history. As Mr. G reminds us of the great growth of America in the late 1800’s he conveniently leaves out that our growth was dependent on our Natural Resources (Oil, Steel – which is iron, with a new German process that adds coke to Iron to make steel) What propelled us was the electrification of the nation. But Mr.G wants us to return to the robber barron days of winner take all. And on top of it he wants to toss on a tariff war (as if those had worked out so well in the past)
    .
    Let’s review the Right’s battle cries. “Business is stagnant because of high taxes, let’s drop taxes and business will thrive!” We dropped taxes and business thrived, but the worker came out with the short end because his share of the taxes went up (the government stopped sending money to the schools, the school’s suffered and the local schooland property taxes went up, and up, and up!)
    .
    “Uh, the economy is stagnant because the business are too regulated!” So we deregulated them. Businesses thrived as those that used to borrow from the S&L simply bought the S&L with Junk bonds, and then “borrowed” from the S&L for ventures that any regulated entity would not be allowed to lend for. But there were no regulations and no regulators. When they didn’t pay the money back, we taxpayers did.
    .
    “We need lower taxes!” Did I just misread GHWB’s lips? He’s raising taxes! Only on you, middle class. Those in the top brackets were actually paying less. GHWB took the heat, thus distracting you from the truth of how his tax plan worked.
    .
    Then came Clinton, who raide taxes and reinvested into America.
    .
    “We did it!” shouted the right! And then they said , "But the reason Banks are going global is that we have too much regulation here. So Sens. Graham et al deregulated some more.
    .
    Business was good. Then came two wars! Business was durned good! Even though the economy was in a shambles.
    .
    So the right cried “We need lower taxes!” So GWB cut taxes and spent like a drunken sailor.
    .
    So we had low taxes, low regulation and massive federal spending on the supplies of war and the rebuilding of NYC (or so it was supposed to be) and the creation of the largest, most intrusive government agency EVER (Homeland Security). No problem, especially since we deregulated the media ownership so that only one version of “the truth” was getting out to much of the nation.
    .
    So here we are, post the deregulatory nukular bomb eksplosion. And Mr. B is calling for “Lower Taxes” to be paid for by higher tariffs (costs which are passed directly on to the US Consumer so here we are paying for corporations once again!)
    .
    Buchanan is not Conservative. He is a shill for the monied interests that want to effectively own this nation. Graham is a dishonest unthinking idiot. To throw your lot in with either of those two does disgrace to your family name!

  11. Refresh Comments.