The effect of Taxation on American High tech by France of three percent - Page 5
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 262
  1. #81
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    7,445
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    455
    Likes (Received)
    4915

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jancollc View Post
    Except the money injected into the economy has nothing to do with Keynesian spending. It is private capital that moved from from overseas accounts to the US.

    The windfall to the Treasury is a bonus, since that money would otherwise remain where it was.

    If you can't see the qualitative difference between the points I made, vs. slapping a meaningless label on something and dismissing it- well, clearly I am wasting my time.
    As you say, the money is a windfall. And as I said, it will have a short term stimulative effect -- mainly seen in current stock prices due to dividends and stock buybacks. Pretty much everyone left and right thought repatriation of corporate profits had to happen and Trump is happy to take credit -- as if it is an eternal boost.

    We might also agree that having parity in global corporate tax rates is a good thing -- though that should require a system less infested with tax loopholes than our own.

    The broader issue is what are we doing to see that both public and private investments are made with real returns -- and not to build bridges to nowhere in the public sector or reward private sector players (hundreds of examples, including many noted above and Trump real estate, casinos, airlines, ties, vodka, university, charities . . .) skimming money off the top while screwing their shareholders, customers, public, and nation.

    Our current administration is not just silent on this, but celebrating as "smart" everything from personal tax evasion, fraud, and money laundering to national debt-based stimulus, chaotic trade policy, spite-filled initiatives (even in nuclear arms policy), with likely the most corrupt Cabinet in history, continued obstruction of disclosure, and a near endless litany of self-serving lies. Instead of investing in something like infrastructure, it's more about race baiting. Instead of celebrating winning teamwork, whether in government or business, it's all about the narcissist in chief.

    Until we start celebrating individuals and companies adding real value -- and punishing those those lining their own pockets at the expense and sometimes lives of others -- we'll keep pissing away resources ($$$, infrastructure, climate, trade, treaties, allies, moral norms) our kids will surely need.

    Probably right, though, that I'm also wasting my time in hoping to get this point across.

  2. Likes Milland, daryl bane liked this post
  3. #82
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,246
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    406
    Likes (Received)
    1632

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thermite View Post
    ..except that it adds to "M1 money". Where velocity matters as well as amount, and "perception" of available coverage for loans matters as much as actual reserves NOT available for loans at all [1].
    Velocity of money is important wrt growth and inflation, yes.

    Currency and demand deposits held outside the US are already part of the M1 money supply, so moving it from offshore to the US does not change the M1.

    Still nothing to to with Keynesian spending, which is by definition government spending. This is private capital we are talking about.

  4. #83
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    7,445
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    455
    Likes (Received)
    4915

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    So what's the diff between orange hair and your man obummer ? Bernanke didn't even borrow pots of money, he just conjured it up out of thin air then handed it over to the very same people who caused the 2009 depression. . .
    Seems to me you're half right.

    Prior to Obama, our political and regulatory climate set the stage for gambling with other people's money - and the bust to follow. In the run up to his election, people (and Obama) likely thought the election was about who could heal race relations, maybe increase the coverage and cut the cost of healthcare. Turned out, Job One was to do triage on a bleeding economy.

    Obama probably wasn't the best choice to manage a crashed economy - not likely McCain either. So he followed conventional economic wisdom, which was to inject money into the economy. Did a half decent job of it, but one can image a world in which we actually had shovel-ready infrastructure projects and knew how to quickly inject high ROI money into local banks rather than the usual too-big-to-fail suspects. Personally, I don't fault Obama for not being the next great Nobel winning economist -- or not knowing who beyond the usual suspects to handle it -- or even Democrats and Republicans for putting up Obama and McCain at a time we needed different leadership. Did the best they could, given the crashing economy handed to them from years prior of abuse. Recall how close we where to a global meltdown, perhaps lasting decades.

    As you suggest, Trump is continuing to inject borrowed or one-time found money into the economy. The difference is that the patient (our economy) is no longer bleeding and about to crash. It's less a move we have to take -- and one that's being made pretty purely for short-term gain.

  5. #84
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    7,445
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    455
    Likes (Received)
    4915

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jancollc View Post
    . . . Still nothing to to with Keynesian spending, which is by definition government spending. This is private capital we are talking about.
    Keynes clearly thought that both private and public spending were stimulative. He'd have no trouble figuring that borrowing a trillion from the next generation for tax cuts or repatriating half a trillion of overseas profits would have a stimulative effect. Indeed, what Keynes is credited for is an understanding that public and private spending are pretty much the same in terms of stimulative effect.

    True enough that it our exit from the "Great Recession" was one that Keynes would argue for - increased government spending. But he'd surely understand the current policy of incurring public debt to put money into (mostly) the hands of mostly private financial interests is stimulative, for the short-term, and (likely) not in our nation's longer term interest.

  6. #85
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Virginia
    Posts
    25,645
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7561
    Likes (Received)
    8077

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jancollc View Post
    This is private capital we are talking about.
    What do you mean "we"?


  7. #86
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    peekskill, NY
    Posts
    24,128
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    4371

    Default

    [QUOTE=EmanuelGoldstein;3384571]So what's the diff between orange hair and your man obummer ?

    Actually one of the economic policy issues of his, that I strongly disagreed with. My feeling was he should
    have simply allowed the US financial industries to all blow up and die in 2008. Sure there would have been
    a world of hurt of the little man but the masters of the universe would have had their water cut off hard
    and fast.

    This would have probably resulted in world wide depression and the eventual election of another FDR.
    Honestly compared to FDR, obama was a republican. Certainly, clinton would come out as more of a
    republican compared with FDR. Heck, even sanders would.

    Sometimes you just need to touch bottom before you come up. For a certainty, trump would have been
    bankrupted yet again and would never had a chance to run.

  8. #87
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,246
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    406
    Likes (Received)
    1632

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thermite View Post
    What do you mean "we"?

    "We" as in those of us on this thread who are discussing the "repatration" of dollars held by US MNE's in overseas accounts, as a result of the TCJA passed in 2018.

  9. #88
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Virginia
    Posts
    25,645
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7561
    Likes (Received)
    8077

    Default

    [QUOTE=jim rozen;3384924]
    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    So what's the diff between orange hair and your man obummer ?

    Actually one of the economic policy issues of his, that I strongly disagreed with. My feeling was he should
    have simply allowed the US financial industries to all blow up and die in 2008. Sure there would have been
    a world of hurt of the little man but the masters of the universe would have had their water cut off hard
    and fast.

    This would have probably resulted in world wide depression and the eventual election of another FDR.
    Honestly compared to FDR, obama was a republican. Certainly, clinton would come out as more of a
    republican compared with FDR. Heck, even sanders would.

    Sometimes you just need to touch bottom before you come up. For a certainty, trump would have been
    bankrupted yet again and would never had a chance to run.
    The most amusing thing about TDS is how very many otherwise self-reliant folk profess a love for their own economic suicide just to spite a max 8-year annoyance, if-even half that span.

    And y'all wonder why yer being labeled mad-as-in barking, not just mad-as-in-angry?

    Well deserved, it seems....

  10. #89
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,246
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    406
    Likes (Received)
    1632

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteM View Post
    Keynes clearly thought that both private and public spending were stimulative.
    Yes, I'm sure he would agree with Milton Friedman that the sky was blue also.

    Private capital returned from overseas is not a "Keynesian" stimulus.
    Keynesian fiscal stimulus is a decision by the government to increase government spending financed by government borrowing. Keynes advocated fiscal stimulus when the economy was stuck in a recession. In this situation, there is usually a rise in private sector saving and unused resources in the economy. Therefore, if the government borrow and spend, they can help kickstart the economy and provide economic recovery.

    Keynesian Stimulus | Economics Help
    The porkulus was a Keynesian stimulus.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteM View Post
    But he'd surely understand the current policy of incurring public debt to put money into (mostly) the hands of mostly private financial interests is stimulative, for the short-term, and (likely) not in our nation's longer term interest.
    When a company brings money from offshore accounts into the US, and pays a 15.5% tax to the US Treasury, there is no public debt being incurred. It's the opposite- the Treasury gets money that it didn't have to borrow from anyone.

  11. #90
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Virginia
    Posts
    25,645
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7561
    Likes (Received)
    8077

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jancollc View Post
    Private capital returned from overseas is not a "Keynesian" stimulus.
    ..until the "hooverment" loots a share of it and makes it so.

    Why is that so hard? Hoovermint ain't putting ALL of it into orbit?

  12. #91
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,246
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    406
    Likes (Received)
    1632

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thermite View Post
    ..until the "hooverment" loots a share of it and makes it so.
    That I can agree with. 15.5% of the half trillion+ cash brought back in 2018 was pre-hoovered.

  13. #92
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Virginia
    Posts
    25,645
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7561
    Likes (Received)
    8077

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jancollc View Post
    That I can agree with. 15.5% of the half trillion+ cash brought back in 2018 was pre-hoovered.
    Well. there you have it. What goes around .. is administratively parasitized by staff of "the swamp" to the extent that a majority of the loot gets no further from the silly-circle // nut-house bypass than a few hundred miles, and the parasitical classes ta da ...have SPENT it.

    THEN .. a form of free enterprise kicks-in off the back of Food Lion where MANY folk have different types of plastic cards than I, to Wegmanns or Lotte Plaza.

    Not a lot of turd on NOVA streets, either. OUR Democrats outsourced the s**t to Kalifornikyah, long-since.

    "Merit system", that be.

    Whom, anywhere, is more expert at the trafficing of sech merchandise?

  14. #93
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    7,445
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    455
    Likes (Received)
    4915

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jancollc View Post
    Yes, I'm sure he would agree with Milton Friedman that the sky was blue also.

    Private capital returned from overseas is not a "Keynesian" stimulus. . .
    You seemed to have missed both points made. First, that what we're doing now (borrowing a trillion to give tax breaks and repatriating a half trillion of profits) is a one time stimulus. The sort we normally use to bring an economy back to life. Second, (contrary to what many, including apparently Keynes, think) how this "found" money is spent -- the return on that investment -- actually matters. There's some short-term stimulus effect in paying someone to dig and fill holes (whether private or public, Keynes would say). There's a more enduring stimulus effect in actually building something of value, say, an Interstate Highway system or the Internet.

    Back in Keynes day it might have been that most everyone was trying to achieve real returns on investment -- he might have been mostly right that all dollars were created more or less equal in their value to the economy. In these days of Goldman Sachs derivatives and knowingly defrauded customers, various Trump universities and casinos, Shkreli calling jacking up sole-source drug prices "innovation," Enron "inventing" new energy, Perdue Pharma killing patients for "shareholder value," Alaskan bridges to nowhere, private equity stripping companies of value and leaving the public to dispose of the carcass, and the like -- we can't just assume that a trillion or so dollars handed over to the likes of Goldman-Trump-Shkreli-Enron-Perdue-Alaska-Private Equity-Etc. will have any positive and lasting ROI for the nation.

  15. #94
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,246
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    406
    Likes (Received)
    1632

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thermite View Post
    Well. there you have it. What goes around .. is administratively parasitized by staff of "the swamp" to the extent that a majority of the loot gets no further from the silly-circle // nut-house bypass than a few hundred miles, and the parasitical classes ta da ...have SPENT it.
    Which incidentally is the reason we never saw inflation from the Fed's money printing. That money never let the canyons of Wall Street. It just floated on the repo market and ended up in "excess reserves" accounts and treasury debt.

    Speaking of moonbats, I do recall Krugman once advocating large trade deficits on the grounds that we were just "exporting cheap-to-print pieces of paper and importing valuable hard-to-make products in exchange"...

  16. #95
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,246
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    406
    Likes (Received)
    1632

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteM View Post
    You seemed to have missed both points made. First, that what we're doing now (borrowing a trillion to give tax breaks and repatriating a half trillion of profits) is a one time stimulus. The sort we normally use to bring an economy back to life.
    We didn't borrow a trillion dollars to give tax breaks to anyone. Implicit in your statement is that money I earned does not belong to me, and taxing me at a lower rate is somehow borrowing money. The economic effects of the TCJA are the long-term effects of the reduced corporate rates and the shift to a territorial system, and those are permanent changes.

    As I said prev- the only thing really being repatriated is the back taxes. Somewhere around 2/3 of those profits have already been reinvested offshore, and that money can't be relocated. But it doesn't matter where the money resides. Going forward, overseas profits can be invested here without penalty. That's a good thing.

    The Treasury will get a windfall- so that's a one-time thing, except it stretches out over 8 years.

    As far as the deficit- in 2017 it was $666Bn. In 2018 it went up to $779Bn.

    Revenues were flat: $3.315Tn in 2017, $3.329Tn in 2018. Corporate income taxes went down from $297Bn to $205Bn. This was offset by increases from personal income taxes- $1.587Tn to $1.684Tn. Payroll taxes had a modest increase from $1.162Tn to $1.171Tn and excise taxes up from $269Bn to $270Bn.

    On the spending side: Spending increased from $3.981Tn to $4.108Tn. Social Security went from $945Bn to $988Bn. Defense $569Bn to $601Bn. Non-defense discretionary went down from $2.205Tn to $2.195Tn. Interest on the debt went from $263Bn to $325 Bn.

    All in all- a 0.4% increase in revenues and a 3.2% increase in spending resulted in a 17% increase in the deficit from 2017 to 2018.

    Of the $113Bn increase in the deficit, more than half- $62Bn was due to higher interest rates.

  17. #96
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    1,530
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jancollc View Post
    Which incidentally is the reason we never saw inflation from the Fed's money printing. That money never let the canyons of Wall Street. It just floated on the repo market and ended up in "excess reserves" accounts and treasury debt.
    This, quite simply, is untrue. Everything you and I had in the bank is now worth half as much as it was before Bernanke. If you "never saw inflation" then you never bought anything. We could start with the $9 hot dogs, for exmple

    Perhaps the Fed claims there is no inflation but I live in the real world. They also claimed there was no inflation when my loans went to a 25% interest rate. Go to the grocery store some day. Go to any store or restaurant. Have a machine shipped. I have no faith in gubbermint figures, sorry.

    As for thermite, no, no one wanted to see the '30's. But compared with what we got, a situation which is even worse than before in re "investment banking", it would most likely have been better. The banking situation is worse now than it was in 2008. The next time those assholes take us for a ride will be even less pretty, and we'll have even fewer tools to deal with it.

    Printing funny money was bad enough. Giving it to the perpetrators of that giant fraud was shortsighted stupidity. Why did the scorpion sting the fox ?

  18. #97
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,246
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    406
    Likes (Received)
    1632

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    ...Perhaps the Fed claims there is no inflation but I live in the real world. They also claimed there was no inflation when my loans went to a 25% interest rate. Go to the grocery store some day. Go to any store or restaurant. Have a machine shipped. I have no faith in gubbermint figures, sorry.
    CPI numbers come from the BLS, not the Fed. In any case, if you don't trust the numbers, there's no point talking about inflation as there's no other measure that has data behind it.

    The same applies to unemployment rates, GDP, and everything else that the government tracks for one purpose or another.

    Might as well just go fishing, which is a better use of time anyway...

  19. #98
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    7,445
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    455
    Likes (Received)
    4915

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jancollc View Post
    We didn't borrow a trillion dollars to give tax breaks to anyone. Implicit in your statement is that money I earned does not belong to me, and taxing me at a lower rate is somehow borrowing money. . .
    The debt we're racking up today, to slash taxes mostly at the top, will be paid by a next generation. It's borrowed money.

    What IS implicit in my statement is that if a company depends on workers educated in the US; got tax breaks to create jobs and then moved them to China; ships its products on US highways and airways; has its contracts enforced in US courts, maybe even has its overseas assets defended by US embassies or forces -- and then pays near nothing in taxes -- it IS borrowing from the rest of us.

    What's also implicit is that if an individual or company actually uses our resources and financial systems to do harm while paying near zero taxes - - they're not just "borrowing" from the rest of us -- they're stealing from the rest of us.

    So, yeah, I don't think the likes of Bernie Madoff, Enron & Arthur Anderson, Shkreli, Goldman Sachs, Perdue Pharma, Trump Casinos, University etc. have "earned" their money - especially when it has come out of the savings and lives of average citizens -- and these days, a debt for their kids.

    As for the earnings of a small businesses like Janco LLC -- I'm a fan of most any owner-operated business that manages to fairly balance customers, stakeholders, and their own interests. I'd also guess you've been paying taxes at a much higher rate (and using public resources at a lower rate) than your average financial profiteer.

    Notion was we were going to drain the swamp of the critters swallowing our economy and our kids' future. Instead, we've given swamp critters seats at the table. It would be a mistake, I believe, to imagine that the scraps currently being thrown from that table to small business will be a sustainable resource . . . for either your own business or, should you have them, for your kids.

    Back on topic - the 3% the French want for digital firms operating within their country - should it be used sensibly for things like business infrastructure and the productivity (education, health care) of their citizens -- strike me as just the sort of thing I'd like to see more of in the US.

  20. Likes Milland liked this post
  21. #99
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    1,530
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jancollc View Post
    In any case, if you don't trust the numbers, there's no point talking about inflation as there's no other measure that has data behind it.
    I do not believe the numbers, you are correct. One thing they do to get around the facts is choose oddball items to call "consumer prices." As in, laptops are 1/3 as much as they were ten years ago, but bread, meat, and vegetables are twice as much. Therefore it evens out, there is no inflation ... if you can eat your laptop.

    I've been down this road before. I remember the late seventies very well. I had a loan for about a hundred thousand dollars. What the feds were saying and what the bank and grocery stores were doing was entirely different. We won't even mention real estate. Or gasoline. They must have inhabited different planets. Go to the grocery store. Get a machine shipped. Tell me there's no inflation.

    What I had in the bank ? Basically worthless. I could buy a slice of pie, maybe. Hold the ice cream.

    Might as well just go fishing, which is a better use of time anyway...
    Agree with you ... well, crabbing, at least. Or maybe shrimp would be fun.

    One thing I notice is, people in China don't fall for this schtick. They know government figures are all bullshit, and act accordingly. Or I've been told that the people in Africa generally despise their governments. They know they are crooks.

    Why we are so naive beats me ... hope springs eternal, even if it wears orange hair ? Or has black skin ?

  22. #100
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,246
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    406
    Likes (Received)
    1632

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteM View Post
    The debt we're racking up today, to slash taxes for a next generation, will be paid by a next generation. It's borrowed money.
    Same with the Ten Trillion of debt Obama racked up.

    There is an off-balance sheet asset that you should consider; the gov't owns 40% of what you or I, or our kids or their kids make, and will ever make.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteM View Post
    What IS implicit in my statement is that if a company depends on workers educated in the US; got tax breaks to create jobs and then moved them to China; ships its products on US highways and airways; has its contracts enforced in US courts, maybe even has its overseas assets defended by US embassies or forces -- and then pays near nothing in taxes -- it IS borrowing from the rest of us.

    What's also implicit is that if an individual or company actually uses our resources and financial systems to do harm while paying near zero taxes - - they're not just "borrowing" from the rest of us -- they're stealing from the rest of us.

    So, yeah, I don't think the likes of Bernie Madoff, Enron & Arthur Anderson, Shkreli, Goldman Sachs, Perdue Pharma, Trump Casinos, University etc. have "earned" their money - especially when it has come out of the savings and lives of average citizens -- and these days, a debt for their kids.
    You'll never hear me defend Madoff or Blankfein or Dimon or any of the other Wall Street leeches.

    But both of the things you mention- businesses offshoring jobs and the banks getting away with their ripoffs can only be possible when the politicians sell us out. Which is exactly what they do.

    Which is why Chuck Schumer stands up on the floor of the Senate and rants about the banks, and has $250 Million in his campaign fund,- donated by Wall Street banks. Mother Jones. Check it out.

    And why the staffers of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd work as technical lobbyists for wall street banks today.

    Wall Street banks hate Trump, and they loved Hillary. +1 for Trump.

    So I will reserve some criticism for the enablers, if you don't mind.

    I can't blame the company who has to offshore their products, when the alternative is to close up shop because that's what their competitors are doing. If you make Kenmore washing machines and Whirlpool goes to Mexico so they can undercut you, what are you going to do?

    Which is why I hate these trade agreements we have got ourselves into.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteM View Post
    Notion was we were going to drain the swamp of the giants swallowing our economy and our kids' future. Instead, we've given swamp critters seats at the table. It would be a mistake, I believe, to mistake the scraps currently being thrown from that table to small business as a sustainable resource for either your own business or, should you have them, for your kids.
    I never kidded myself that Trump could drain the swamp.

    Maybe we don't need a wall between us and Mexico, we need one between us and D.C.
    Quote Originally Posted by PeteM View Post
    Back on topic - the 3% the French want for digital firms operating within their country - should it be used sensibly for things like business infrastructure and the education and health care of their citizens -- strike me as just the sort of thing I'd like to see here in the US.
    A country has a sovereign right to set their taxes however they want.

    I don't like laws that single out specific companies. The GAFA tax is aimed to hit only 4 companies, and leave everyone else who is just smaller (but does the same tax avoidance BS) alone. Why not tax Pfizer that 3%?

    If you can write a law that targets 4 companies, then you can write a law that targets one. The rule of law means equal treatment under the law. If you can write a law that targets one company, you can write a law that targets one person. That is the rule of men, not the rule of law.

    I have no love for Google, Amazon, Facebook, or Apple- I do as much as I can to avoid them. I have love for the rule of law.


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •