

  (Source: Reuters)
Ireland also blasts U.S. criticism of "tax sheltering"


I. Irish Say Senate's Numbers Are Wrong





Apple Operations







II. Conservatives in the Senate Blast Hearings



The Congressional hearing took place this afternoon.



Tim Cook






John McCain
[Image Source: AP]


III. Sen. Paul Wants Apology From Congress, Reform





Sen. Rand Paul

On Twitter he posted:



Sources: The New York Times, Reuters

Comments     Threshold


RE: Why do we owe takers?
By M'n'M on 5/22/2013 3:40:36 PM , Rating: 2
Money is the power to control who produces what and for whom. If the 'makers' just keep saving (bastardizing the purpose money as a transaction tool) and don't make that choice, then they deserve to lose a chunk of their income and let the masses decide for them.

Am I understanding you properly ? If I save my $$s instead of spending them or "investing" them, I deserve to be punished ? That I have some moral obligation to provide jobs for the masses ??

RE: Why do we owe takers?
By PontiusP on 5/22/2013 4:19:16 PM , Rating: 1
Good point. Mint is a Marxist, and therefore he, and all of the other San Francisco liberals who are so smart, know what's best for your money.

RE: Why do we owe takers?

RE: Why do we owe takers?
By Mint on 5/23/2013 8:18:33 AM , Rating: 2
Mislabel me all you want. It doesn't change the truth.

Marxists don't encourage the rich to spend on themselves and keep the rest of capitalism intact. I'm not in SF, either. It's indisputable that the wealthy don't know what to do with their money, because we've had $1T deficits and they've funded it near 0%. Nobody saves money at negative real interest rate unless they don't know what to do with it.

In other words, we could cut spending by $1T and keep taxes the same, and the wealthy who bought ~0% bonds would simply put that money in equivalent ~0% bank accounts instead. All economic activity funded by that $1T along with multiplier effects simply cease to exist and 10% of jobs disappear. But hey, we got the balanced budget that you crave.

Then we can cut spending even more so that taxes can go down and create your 30% unemployment reduced-taker paradise.

RE: Why do we owe takers?
By Mint on 5/23/2013 7:50:13 AM , Rating: 2
If everyone was a cheapskate and non-investor, the economy would collapse.

If you want to save, then build assets, buy resources, whatever. You will own them, and if you want to spend in the future you can sell them. This is what I mean by the rich directing the economy.

A pile of idle money, however, has no productive value.

Do you know what the purpose of money is? It lets us evaluate the work we can do for each other so that we can conduct fair transactions. It is not meant to have a growing idle stockpile, because until we build a time machine we cannot transport this work into the future. Banks try doing this with debt, but there's a limit to how much can be created and we've all seen what happens when we create too much.

Before you or anyone else mentions the gold standard, it makes idling capital even worse. The more it's hoarded, the more it appreciates in value (through deflation), resulting in even more hoarding.

