Rand Paul

Rand Paul Slams Colleagues for Criticizing Apple's Tax Strategy


Credit: Gage Skidmore/wikimedia

The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations has accused Apple of being "among America's largest tax avoiders," with Subcommittee Chairman Sen. Levin (D-MI) saying that the multinational electronics giant avoided paying $9 billion in tax in 2012.  

Thankfully, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) was on hand to criticize his colleagues for admonishing a corporation that he described as "one of America's greatest success stories."

From Business Insider:

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul went on a great rant during today's Senate subcommittee hearing on Apple's offshore tax practices, slamming his Congressional colleagues for even holding the hearing in the first place.

"Frankly, I'm offended by the tone and tenor of this hearing," Paul said, laying into those who take issue with Apple's tax policies.

"I'm offended by the spectacle of dragging in executives from an American company that is not doing anything illegal," he added. "If anyone should be on trial, it should be Congress."

A video of Paul's comments is below:

NEXT: Chicago Area Man Arrested for Allegedly Threatening U.S. Embassy in Serbia

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. You’ll pay your taxes, regardless of the law, and you’ll like it, too. Anything else is treason.

    1. I have to congratulate McCain. He actually made me side with Apple and give them an attaboy.

      Fucking cunt.

      1. I was just hating Apple last night for some bug in Safari on the iPad.

        1. Geoguessr routinely crashes Safari on my iPad. Apple can’t be made to pay enough for this inconvenience.

        2. I was just hatin’ on Apple for my iPad not being able to connect to my parents’ WiFi.

          1. What I don’t get is the fanboys always going on about the perfection of the Apple devices when I have as many problems with them as I do with the non-Apple devices. More, sometimes.

            One thing I do like about the iPad is the battery. It lasts a good, long time. But that’s not something Apple has a monopoly on.

            1. This is my third Apple product with a significant enough problem for me to be reinforced in my Apple product hatred. The first two I bought with my own hard-earned (and taxed!) cash – an iPod mini whose battery completely died after a year (wouldn’t charge one iota even overnight) and a first-gen iPhone I bought from a colleague whose speakers died after a couple of months, making me miss every single call.

              I replaced the iPod with a Sansa for 1/2 the price and whose battery will hold a charge for months without plugging in (that’s when it’s sitting unused in the bottom of my purse, I mean).

              The iPad I won in a company drawing.

              1. Our iPad has mostly been okay, though it’s not the technological terror I was led to believe. My Fire is about as good for most of what I use tablets for, and it’s a lot cheaper.

                My daughter has an iPhone, and I deem it definitely inferior to the Android products the rest of the family has.

            2. Apple user, talking to IpHone: I’d like to learn about cults.
              Siri: There are six Apple Stores within a 10-mile radius of your current location.

              1. I’ve used Apple products since 1987 and have generally had very good experiences.

    2. So, who would invest the 9 billion dollars Apple allegedly avoided paying in taxes? Apple, or the US government?

      Case closed.

  2. Damn straight. Hate the game not the player. Apple has no duty to the government to not seek all legal means to lessen their tax burden.

    1. Well, with a gigantic tax code at totally unfettered discretion at the IRS, they’re probably guilty of something. Like terrorism.

      1. Or profit. Profit is the highest crime.

        1. So long as some have money they don’t give up for redistribution, we all suffer.

        2. Not if you’re Apple. The lefties usually give Apple a free pass.

          1. They hated Bill Gates and Microsoft, but he’s a hero now to them. I have no reason to believe the opposite can’t happen. They better be careful. For good measure, Apple needs a bullshit “Green” initiative and it needs to start yesterday.

            1. They currently produce the “greenest” products in the industry. They tout this every year, and discuss their new green efforts. This has been going on at least since the iphone introduction.

              As to quality, I use Windows, Debain, and OSX devices. For hard computing/server management/DB manipulation I like Linux. For UI, photos, web (Safari, Firefox, and occasionally Chrome), mail, video editing, and development/coding/IDEs, I far and away prefer OSX. I only use Windows when I am forced to. And when I do I prefer XP. I can operate Lion without a hitch but Vista/Windows 7 are giant pieces of SHIT! So are windows phones. I have not played with Androids so have no input of my own but have heard that they are virus central and buggy.

              To hell with the cultists on BOTH sides. Acknowledge apple for the quality of certain of its products and excoriate it for its failings but do so without the broad brush of cultist/non-cultist.

              1. They currently produce the “greenest” products in the industry. They tout this every year, and discuss their new green efforts.

                Actually didn’t know this. Maybe the apple logo should be green instead of silver. They’ll eat that shit up. Like polar bears on coke cans, baby.

              2. I run both OSX and Windows 7 for various things. Meh, there are things I like and dislike about both. One thing about OSX is that I have had my macbook for 4 years now and it still runs like a champ. Every windows system I have had (before Win 7) would need a complete system wipe almost every years to keep from boggin down to a snails pace.

                I am really enjoying windows 7. I used to love windows xp but 7 is my new favourite.

                1. I will forced into & shortly…i will be updating you as to a more long term intense usage after I have more than 200 hours on it.

  3. And, the media will report this as “Rand Paul supports tax evasion by giant profiteering corporation”.

    1. Good thing no one is actually watching MSNBC.


    2. “Rand Paul supports tax evasion by giant profiteering corporation…”\

      Append “Without which you’d have no iPod, iPhone or iPad and touch screen phones may still not have made it to market.”

      Kinda changes the way one might view Apple, eh?

      Also: this is just a symptom of the “I want everything and I don’t want to pay for it” mentality.

      1. There were touchscreen phones well before the first-generation iPhone.

        1. Word, I was rocking all my emulators and roms on an HTC Tytn, and I was years late to the party compared to earlier adopters.

        2. People like anon don’t realize other people can see the reality distortion field.

        3. There were touchscreen phones well before the first-generation iPhone.

          Ones that sucked, sure.

          1. This.

            I had a Treo 600…the iPhone caused me to mess my shorts the instant i saw it in action. I dumped the Treo so fast that the iPhone was calling it saying “goodye” before it hit the floor.

          2. Kind of like mp3 players. There were lots of brands available before the iPod, but they were all junk.

      2. It’s more of a “I want everything and someone else should have to pay for it” mentality.

  4. I was just saying this morning that I didn’t have much hope for getting a Hughes-esque or Rearden-esque turnabout out of this hearing, but apparently Rand is getting a little rant in there.

    1. Jobs would have been the only personality close to Hughes that could have been an analog and I don’t think he would ever have done that. He (rightfully) believed people like those in congress are beneath him.

      1. I think Jobs believed the same about pretty much all humans.

  5. I can’t watch the video. How does “the multinational electronics giant avoided paying $9 billion in tax in 2012” from Sen. Levin match up with Sen. Paul saying “an American company that is not doing anything illegal”?

    Is it typical government accounting? Something like, “Well, Apple should have paid $9billion more, but there were some loopholes and they moved some profits and losses around, so they didn’t pay those $9bil”?

    1. Avoiding taxes is totally legal.

      Evading taxes gets you thrown in jail.

      1. I guess I don’t see the difference.

        Like “avoiding a speedtrap” versus “evading a cop at a speedtrap”?

        1. Like not driving on that road.

        2. Avoiding speedtrap = Going out of your way to not pass through it.

          Evading speedtrap = Going through the speedtrap and not stopping.

          1. It was my analogy, I understood the difference in regards to speedtraps lol.

            I just didn’t see how avoiding paying taxes (I guess finding exemptions and deductions) was different from evading taxes (being liable for and not paying).


            1. I avoid paying state taxes on certain goods by purchasing them from another state. I would be evading paying taxes if I bought the item in state and did not report the purchase.

              1. Your state probably has a use tax law, so you are evading them if you dont report it to your state.

                1. Note: my previous post not applicable if you live in one of the states without salex tax.

                  1. Your state probably has a use tax law, so you are evading them if you dont report it to your state.

                    As if I’d ever admit that to be the truth.

                2. “Your state probably has a use tax law”


                  “so you are evading them if you dont report it to your state.”


              2. Under no circumstances do I “owe” any tax dollars to anyone. My employer withholds some so the government will allow it to remain in operation, and I pay some others to avoid going to jail. That’s it.

                Maybe someday they’ll stop robbing us, when we convince enough people that government is immoral.

    2. Apple legally avoided paying those taxes. Like most international companies, they NEVER bring profits from abroad back into the U.S.

      It makes the taxman really mad to see all that cash they can’t take 40% of.

      1. Where’s the nexus if the income is purely overseas? What’s the justification for the government thinking it should get that money?

        1. They want it.

          Did you see Into Darkness?

          1. No, of course not. Why would I do such a thing?

            1. You want to get away from your kids for 2 hours and watch shit blow up in space?

              1. SOLD!

                1. Seriously, I wouldn’t have thought Pro Lib would be a movie snob.

                  I mean, was it Wrath of Kahn? No. But was it a fun 2 hours? Yes.

                  1. I’m not a movie snob. But I saw and continue to see no point in rebooting something into something inferior. I could even handle Star Trek with Kung-Fu Action Grip if it were internally consistent and reasonable. But it’s just a mess.

                    1. Cumberbatch has got to be the best actor today. You know not of what you speak…and I AM A MONTALBAN FANBOI!!!!!

                    2. I love Sherlock, and I think he’s great. But that’s neither here nor there.

                    3. One internal inconsistency in the movie I saw was:

                      If they have this transwrap transporter that can be used to teleport between solar systems, why the hell do you even need ships or long range torpedoes? Want to invade? Just transport some shock troops and bombs onto the planet light years away.

                      Though the TV shows also all had a bunch of inconsistency with distances and speeds.

                      One point of consistency in favor of Into Darkness: at one point they come out of wrap and someone says they are “237,000 kilometers from Earth”. I immediately thought “But that’s right at Earth!” A couple seconds later they show the ship inside the orbit of the Moon. (The effect of this accuracy was hurt by the fact that the return trip took a few seconds compared to the several hours/almost a day it to took on the way out)

                    4. Inconsistency’s (h.) definition in Webster is “Star Trek”.

                      Even WoK had several glaring ones to the diehards…like Checkov never met Khan, he hadn’t joined the cast yet. But Khan “never forgets a face”. And with the “alternate timeline” of the new series they can pretty much do anything they want.

                      Alternate timelines are SciFi’s FYTW.

                    5. That’s true, I guess the alternate timeline could provide an out to getting back from the center of Klingon space in a couple of minutes or less: Spock/that miner guy brought back future tech in the the first JJ movie.

                    6. I agree, but with the Chekov bit, the character could’ve been on the ship, just not on the bridge. At least there’s a non-insane plausible explanation.

                    7. Or what ProL said.

                    8. The Khan/Checkov one has a plausible explanation: Koenig hadn’t joined the cast yet but the Checkov character could easily have been assigned somewhere else during “Space Seed” and maybe they met each other off-camera. Unless they established that he joined the Enterprise after the episode it’s not a definitive error.

                    9. Xeno is a trekkie!!!!


                    10. I didn’t think it was a secret.

                    11. My favorite inconsistency is when they have long range weapons (like a few hundred thousand kilometers long range weapons), and they still get within visual range to fight.

                    12. subspace weapons were outlawed…blah blah blah.


                    13. And they always are oriented exactly the same, never upside down, etc.

                    14. Interesting trivia, the Reliant in WoK WAS upside down cause the drawings were approved that way. I was supposed to have the Nacelles on top not bottom.

                    15. Well, Wrath of Khan was the sole use of “three dimensional thinking” in basically all of Star Trek.

                    16. Also true. It’s hardly like Star Trek–any iteration–was without flaws. But this new one is just silly.

                    17. I think that might be the funniest part of all Star Trek: when Kirk and Spock act smug because someone else is acting like spaceships can’t go up and down.

                    18. No kidding, that was a jarring moment the first time I saw the film at the theater. “Oh, now space is all three dimensiony.”

                    19. Of course, that led to one of the biggest wall bangers in the movie: a federation ship pops out of warp right next to Earth, with this gigantic ship no one has ever seen before on it’s tail and shooting at it, and no one else gets involved in the fight? Where’s all the other ships that would be around earth? Orbital defense? Hello? Anybody?

                      Not to mention the physics fail: if you’re in orbit around a planet and you lose power, you don’t suddenly start falling straight down toward it.

                    20. They weren’t in orbit, so they would fall straight down.

                    21. Yeah, the rationale there is they were in an unstable position and being held in position via active power, not in an orbit. Of course, even if they were at a dead stop at 237,000 km it would take a hell of a lot longer to fall back to the earth.

        2. You have an employee or a bank account here, right? That’s nexus enough. Cough up the dough.


        3. It doesn’t matter if there’s a nexus. Apple has big piles of money, and dammit, that’s just not fair!

    3. It means that if they had stupid accountants they could have paid 9 billion more.

      1. That’s what I figured. Thanks!

        1. Last year, I avoided about $9k in federal taxes by exploiting legal loopholes like the mortgage interest deduction and charitable deductions and state property tax deductions — loopholes put into the taxcode by evil bastards that pass laws.

  6. Rand Mutha Fuckin Paul!

  7. “Thankfully, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) was on hand to criticize his colleagues for admonishing a corporation that he described as “one of America’s greatest success stories.””

    Maybe it wouldn’t have been so successful had it paid those taxes.

    1. Maybe?

      Of course it wouldnt have been.

      Thats why it set it self up so it didnt have to pay them.

    2. “Maybe it wouldn’t have been so successful had it paid those taxes.”

      Obviously not, paying bills you’re not liable for is no way to be successful.

      1. I bet you Apple employees use roads too. Fucking bastards.

    3. The ease of avoiding corporate income taxes in this manner implies tax incidence largely falls upon the employees.

  8. Nothing is more repulsive than scumbag parasite politicians decrying a company for naturally trying to minimize its tax burden. Hey, Levin, how about we scrutinize your tax return, you little bitch? What do you say to that, scumbag?

    1. “Nothing is more repulsive than scumbag parasite politicians decrying a company for naturally trying to minimize its tax burden.”

      I maintain that scumbag politicians praising their fellow politicians for trying to maximize our tax burden is even more repulsive.

    2. Unless he takes no deductions, exemptions or credits, he doesn’t have much moral force behind his argument.

    3. Of course, these bitches are going to minimize Their taxes. e.g. didn’t liberal icon Metzenbaum move from Ohio to Florida near the end of his life, in order to minimize estate taxes ? Sauce for the goose….

      1. Florida also has no state income tax.

    4. I will never forget how, when the Clintons released their tax returns one year while Bubba was in office, he deducted old boxer shorts he had donated to a charity @ 3 bucks a pop. No word on Hil’s old panties.

      I pity the poor assistant who had to do that inventory.

    5. That was basically the first thing Paul said. He said every member of the committee minimized their individual tax burden.

    6. I’d love to see some Apple suit go Hank Rearden on them.

      “You want me to pay more and not keep profits overseas? Fine, pass a law to force me to bring it back. But you won’t do that, you coward. You simply want to guilt me to hand over more money instead of having to exert a power that would hurt the economy and sink your rich donor buddies with me. I won’t play ball, and to be honest, I don’t even need to be here. Call me back when you get serious.”

      1. I would play the video of that on repeat forever. All I want is someone to stand up to these thugs in a Hank Rearden type way.

  9. When it comes time for Apple to make donations to the presidential candidate they think is going to stick up for them in Washington, I hope they remember who it was in Washington that stuck up for them.


      Could you imagine the insanity from hipster liberals when Apple contributes to a PAC for Rand Paul? That will be AWESOME!

      1. The people at Apple themselves are scratching their heads right now.

        Management just sent an email to their lobbying group checking to see if they already made a contribution.

        They’re trying to figure out why Rand Paul would do something like this.

        It’ll sink in.

    2. They won’t.

    3. The beauty of it is I don’t think Rand expects anything from Apple. He’s making statements based on principle.

      But it would be nice.

  10. Obviously the real issue here is that Apple didn’t donate enough money to enate PACs.

    1. I’m sure a $9 billion donation would make all this go away.

  11. Shortened version: Fuck you Max Baucus for wasting all of our time.

  12. I LOVE this man!

    1. Agreed. It’ll be great watching Republican talking heads tell us how unelectable he is in a couple of years and why Santorum is a lock for the Oval Office.

    2. *slurp* *slurp*

      falling into the love obsession with politicians, I see. Has Obama taught you people anything?

      1. The difference being, he will lose my admiration should he stray from the principles he portrays.

        See the difference, Kurby?

        1. That is the big difference here. I love the man for the principles he portrays not because of some cult of personality BS like progladytes with Obama.

        2. if you have principles such as continuing the drug war, hoping there was more military presence overseas to protect our illicit diplomats meddling around in war zones, calling pro-drug libertarians stoners, and wanting to control women’s health at a federal level, then Rand is most certainly your man.

          You mind of well vote for whoever the GOP shits out

          1. Except he hasn’t said any of those things.

            He’s for:
            Reducing drug sentences.
            Decreasing overseas presence/intervention.
            And has repeatedly called for giving abortion law to the states.

            1. You randites are too funny

              Rand Paul Proposes Federal “Life at Conception” Law

              Rand Paul Clarifies Marijuana Position: Don’t Legalize, but Reduce Sentencing

              or are you going to put your fingers in your ears because I’m going against the chosen one?

              1. and reduced drug sentencing is still bullshit. It still counts on your record and destroys all sorts of employment opportunities

                1. Is his drug policy better than what your have now?


                  You act as if being pro-life is being un libertarian. It is not.

                  BTW, do you have someone better in mind? Do you really think another person exists how agrees with YOU on EVERY issue?

                  1. your

                    1. your

                  2. reduced drug sentences isn’t even a benefit. It kicks you back on the street sooner to fight with whatever employment reputation you have left.

                    And no…no politician will ever please anyone. What’s why we have to do away with them as soon as possible

                    1. What…evvver!

                    2. yeah, just roll your eyes around in your head. I’ll be laughing on the sidelines when the American sheep get disappointed with this favorite politician time and time again while they drown in debt

                    3. Okey dokey

    3. I did, but until I know for sure the shit he says to the religious right and drug-warring jackboots is all just pandering, I will remain tepidly optimistic about his run.

      This is promising though.

      1. As Kinnith said the other day. I’ll vote for the 90% solution that can win, over the 100% solution that can’t.

        If drugs and SSM are his only shitty positions, he’s got my vote.

        1. I’d even go as low as 75%. Not disagreeing, just maintaining the vigilant skepticism that all politicians deserve.

      2. “pandering is OK if my guy does it”

        he has more than shown willingness to advocate for the SoCon agenda through legislation. You’re just too busy advocating for your own messiah to see it

  13. But if someone were overburdened with perfectly legal taxes, he’d not be rushing to the defense of the law, would he? The scandal is that it is illegal to evade practically all taxes while still enjoying (in a hugely profitable way) the things taxes pay for. Not paying for the stuff you use is stealing.

    1. *illegal s/b legal

    2. The avoiding vs evading discussion is up there ^^^.

    3. Apple’s shareholders pay tons of taxes. They pay on dividends, and they pay on capital gains. Apple’s employees pay tons of income taxes…

      Apple doesn’t owe you anything, you lazy parasite.

      Why don’t you get a job?

      1. Because then he’d have to pay taxes, silly.

        1. Tony’s always wanting other people’s money. He always seems to think he’s entitled to other people’s money.

          He think he deserves other people’s money.

          That kind of thinking doesn’t come from working for a living. …not unless you’re working for a union or the government.

          1. And Apple thinks it’s entitled to the American marketplace, infrastructure, generations of science and technology progress, law and order, and the legal protections of corporationhood, only without paying anything for it because of the exploitation of a tax law loophole. How is that not stealing again?

            1. There is no such thing as a “loophole” in laws. There is compliance and non-compliance. What you call a “loophole” is actually just code for “something happened I don’t like but was perfectly legal”. Well fuck you.

              1. Uh, a loophole that is not legal is called a crime, not a loophole.

                1. There is no such thing as a loophole, tony. Things are either legal or they aren’t. There is no such thing in the law as being right “in spirit”, especialyl when it comes to the tax code.

                  Let’s say you’re safely traveling with the prevailing rate of traffic at 70 MPH in a 65 MPH, endangering no one. Guess what? Still illegal. Let’s say you’re going 55 MPH in a 65 MPH and you’re pissing everyone off behind you. Guess what? Still legal.

                  There is no such thing as a loophole. Write in on the blackboard as many times as necessary.

                  1. Randian – long time no see.

                    1. Wow, I really do have a stalker. I feel blessed.

                      LTC, thanks for welcoming me back!

            2. So not giving your own money to the government which you are not legally required to give over is stealing. Is even Tony really stupid enough to believe this? If so, then I guess we can assume Tony sends all of his money to the government.

            3. “exploitation of a tax law loophole”

              IOW, complying with the law.

              The alternative here would be to tax corporations on what they make outside of the US (like they do with individuals). But it seems likely that that would cause a whole lot more corporations to incorporate off shore and just ship product to the US, taking even more potential investments and jobs out of the US economy.
              Get rid of corporate taxes and a whole bunch of that profit will be invested in the US, creating wealth and jobs and, if that’s what you are into, more tax revenue. The emphasis on the evil corporations not paying taxes is totally foolish because it is exactly that policy that keeps them from repatriating the money they make overseas. They aren’t going to start just because it’s a nice thing to do.

              1. I’m pretty sure Tony’s solution would be for Washington to just tax the entire world. That way no one can escape paying their ‘fair share’. Which is whatever the Tonys of the world think it should be. Just be glad they let you keep any of your earnings evil, nasty, profitssesssss.

                1. Tony’s world is actually much more dangerous than that. Tony doesn’t believe in the written rule of law. if something “feels unfair” then we convene a kangaroo court to rewrite the tax code on the spot, retroactive to whenever we feel like.

                  Tony isn’t stupid. He’s totalitarian scum.

                  1. Tony isn’t stupid. He’s totalitarian scum.

                    I’m gonna have to go with “both” on this one.

              2. IOW, complying with the law.

                It’s not like Congress enacted the tax laws, though.

            4. I’d say paying between $7 and $8 billion per year to the government is more than not paying anything, and far from stealing from

              1. Deducting your mortgage interest is exploiting a tax loophole!!!ONE!!1!

            5. The owners of Apple are entitled to engage in voluntary exchange with other humans, whenever, wherever. It’s not their problem that you force them into your system and then try and fail to extort money from them to pay for it. Not that they haven’t already paid for it.

              generations of science and technology progress

              Not owned or provided by the government.

              1. And it’s not as if Apple isn’t further contributing to the progress of science and technology.

            6. “And Apple thinks it’s entitled to the American marketplace, infrastructure, generations of science and technology progress, law and order, and the legal protections of corporationhood, only without paying anything for it because of the exploitation of a tax law loophole.”

              Tony doesn’t know that Apple’s shareholders pay taxes on dividends and capital gains. Tony doesn’t know that Apple’s employees pay income taxes.

              Tony doesn’t know that Apple retails stores generate tons of retail sales taxes. Tony doesn’t know that Apple pays property taxes.

              Tony doesn’t care about the facts, though. It’s basically like arguing with a Moonie. He doesn’t care whether he’s right or wrong–he only cares that he’s supporting the Progressive cause.

              Little does he realize that nobody has done more than Tony to delegitimatize the progressive cause in the minds of everyone he talks to. If the progressives were smart, they’d pay him to keep his mouth shut–for fear of making them look so stupid.

              1. Tony isn’t real. He’s nothing. A tired character run by a bored prankster who’s just going through the motions. There’s no sense of hateful glee left, no malicious joy. He just calls up a post, says something moronic without a lot of typos and you guys feed him bland fauxrage. He’s just stirring a pot gone cold with as rusted out spoon. We’re his life. We’re his everything. I can’t imagine a sadder, more dissapated life. We may be all that’s keeping him from ending it.

                1. The saddest part is all the people who respond to such an obvious sockpuppet. It’s really quite pathetic.

                  1. I think that what he really gets off on is people pointing out that he is a sock puppet in every thread he comments on. Stop feeding it!

                  2. Honestly, I wish the owner would just out himself/retire the sockpuppet.

            7. “And Apple thinks it’s entitled to the American marketplace, infrastructure, generations of science and technology progress, law and order, and the legal protections of corporationhood, only without paying anything for it because of the exploitation of a tax law loophole.”

              Apple paid $4B in federal income taxes from 2009 to 2012. Your assertion that they aren’t paying anything is flat out wrong.

            8. It is only on Planet Prog that not paying a tax you don’t have to pay is considered stealing.

              It is only on Planet Tony that those who pay the most in taxes are considered to be paying nothing.

            9. Tony| 5.21.13 @ 12:57PM |#
              “And Apple thinks it’s entitled to the American marketplace, infrastructure,…”

              IOWs, all the stuff they already pay for and make possible.
              Man, you’re a slimy turd!

          2. Tony is special. He’s enlightened and smart and believes in all the right things. We libertarians, in contrast, are crass, heartless meanies who think reality is more important than theory. Therefore, we should work hard and pay taxes that will go to Tony so he can sit on his ass and tell us what jerks we are for not being enlightened like him.

            1. I’m a good liberal. I consider stupid people to be victims, not moral transgressors.

              What is the libertarian the victim of? For my money, it’s the lack of subsidized higher education. So sorry. Carry on jerking off to fantasy novels and we will work on that for you.

              1. Parasite logic at work. Thanks for enlightening us, Tony!

              2. I’m a good liberal.

                So, you’re like a unicorn?


              3. If the stupid people can make mincemeat of your arguments, as happens pretty much every time you post anything, what does that make you?

          3. the one abiding principle of the left: Gimme, gimme, gimme

            1. I believe I’ve clearly demonstrated that Rand Paul and you simpletons are the ones advocating for theft.

              1. Whenever someone says he has “clearly demonstrated” his point, you can read that as “I am bullshitting”

              2. I believe I’ve clearly demonstrated that Rand Paul and you simpletons are the ones advocating for theft.

                You are a lying immoral piece of pig shit.

              3. I believe I’ve clearly demonstrated that Rand Paul and you simpletons are the ones advocating for theft.

                You’ve demonstrated nothing of the sort. The fact that you “believe” you have says….everything.

              4. Tony| 5.21.13 @ 12:59PM |#
                “I believe I’ve clearly demonstrated that Rand Paul and you simpletons are the ones advocating for theft.”

                Yeah, shithead, you bleeve all sorts of fantasies.

            2. You simpletons should treat every day like a Thursday.

              1. You simpletons should treat every day like a Thursday.

                Fuck off, sockpuppet.

                Is that better?

      2. I have a job, but I’m not a hugely profitable corporation, so I have to pay taxes. Double, sometimes quadruple taxes by your definition. I thought you guys were against corporate cronyism.

        1. Corporations shouldn’t pay taxes. They only do as an excuse to control their accounting practices related to non-cash perks.

          1. English mutherfucka, do you speak it ?

            1. Economics, shithead, do you know it?

              1. Apparently not.

          2. They, as in the companies shareholders, pay a hell of a lot more taxes then you do, since all you pay is your marginal rate, whereas they pay a corporate tax followed up by a capital gains/dividend tax.

            Why are you using government services that they paid for? Doesn’t that make you a thief?

        2. Cronyism = Government carving out an “Apple loophole”

          Cronyism != Apple’s accountants finding ways to pay less taxes in existing tax law

        3. “I have a job, but I’m not a hugely profitable corporation”

          I work for a hugely profitable corporation and we pay millions and millions in taxes each year.

        4. Then join us in lobbying to reduce your tax burden.

        5. “I have a job, but I’m not a hugely profitable corporation, so I have to pay taxes.”

          Apple makes products that enrich the lives of hundreds of millions of people who buy their products of their own free will. How many people’s lives do you make more productive and fulfilling? Also, are you asserting that Apple pays no taxes?

        6. Tony| 5.21.13 @ 12:55PM |#
          “I have a job, but I’m not a hugely profitable corporation, so I have to pay taxes.”

          Go whine to your congress-critter, shithead. I don’t care.

        7. Corporations are not people (at least that’s what I keep hearing from obnoxious people on my Facebook feed), so I’m not sure why you are comparing them to yourself.

      3. He has one. He’s on the Obama Administration’s payroll to troll libertarian websites.

        1. You know, I was just thinking that he might be some low-level bureaucrat. Since he’s obviously unemployable in any productive capacity, it makes sense that he’d be hostile to anyone who can earn a living without putting a gun to their neighbor’s head.


    4. Forcing people to pay for things they don’t want is also stealing.

      1. Forcing people to pay for things they don’t want is also stealing.

        Technically, first the theft occurs (taxation). Then the thieves (politicians) use some of the loot to buy votes and faux legitimacy, and take jobs away from a free marketplace and replace them with overpriced and inefficient monopoly “services”.

        So, the theft isn’t to pay FOR anything. It’s just theft.

    5. No, the real scandal is that we tax corporations too heavily, giving them incentives to keep profits offshore and preventing or drastically reducing investment domestically.

      1. Of course. Do we want a robust economy? How about we let it happen?

        1. I think all the talk about the evils of off-shoring is one of the nastiest tricks the left has pulled off on the economic front. Loads of people have this vague idea that there is some tax benefit to “sending jobs overseas”. Which is true in a way. But what they completely miss is that it is in fact a tax penalty for investing and employing people in the US. What I want to know is why libertarians and sensible conservatives aren’t better at correcting this. I guess probably because you have to think about it for more than a minute to understand. “Evil republicans pay companies to send jobs off-shore” is much simpler.

          1. I think all the talk about the evils of off-shoring is one of the nastiest tricks the left has pulled off on the economic front.

            I agree, but for different reasons. Not having to make T-Shirts in the USA frees people up to do more useful shit, like making the AA-12 shotgun.

            1. Oh, I agree with that reason as well. There is no reason why everything needs to be made domestically and there are many things that we are much better off having made elsewhere. I think that the disincentive to bring back capital is much worse than the disincentive to bring back low skill manufacturing jobs. Though with advances in automation and, hopefully, a developing world that continues to get richer, I think you’d eventually see a lot more basic manufacturing come back as well.

              1. I think you’d eventually see a lot more basic manufacturing come back as well.

                I, for one, welcome our robot overlords.

                1. I actually make robots, so presumably that means that even once they take over, they will have to obey me. Either that or they are useful machines that will, with a bit of luck, make me a lot of money some day.

                  1. Can you make robots that hover near me and seem to do things at my bidding but actually rule me like a benevolent god?

                    1. We’ll get on those mechanized Wartys right away!

                      …Wait, did you say benevolent?

          2. Another aspect is that the U.S. has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world (especially when you include state taxes), plus we tax money made in foreign countries, which most countries don’t do.

    6. Then send them a bill directly for the services they used. They should also be given the option to buy those services elsewhere if they so choose.

      Congress complaining that Apple didn’t pay enough in taxes is like the manager at Chotchkie’s chiding his employee for not wearing enough flair.

      If you want them to express themselves and pay more in taxes, then make it the law that they have to pay more in taxes! And I don’t mean 100,000 pages of tax law that could be interpreted many different ways.

      1. + 1 cubicle with a view

      2. The tax code must be written in such a manner that it could be interpreted many different ways. Otherwise, the Tonys of the world wouldn’t be able to give a pass to their enlightened pals who are in the exact same line of business as evil, rich capitalists who must be forced to pay their fair share.

    7. 1) Apple has paid $4B in federal income taxes from 2009 to 2012. It has not evaded “practically all taxes.”
      2) Apple doesn’t create US tax law. Congress does. A congressional hearing berating Apple for complying with the law that Congress wrote is ludicrous.

    8. Once again, instead of reading Tony’s misspelled and poorly understood talking points, you could just go to HuffPo for the exact same thing:


    9. It’s not illegal because you wish it were so. Maybe no legislator intended for the law to be so crazy that a company could be a free rider as you accuse Apple of being, but that doesn’t make it illegal.

    10. “Not paying for the stuff you use is stealing.”

      True. I guess that means most Democrats won’t get any government services, since most of them don’t pay taxes.

  14. How cute, little Rand gets to be the Golden Child again.

    1. Yeah, I was thinking that. Every time he annoys me with some socon pandering, he comes out and does something fucking awesome.

      It’s not as awesome as actually changing the tax code, but I’ll take speaking out against The Man.

  15. Huffpo is not amused.

    450 Fans
    3 minutes ago (12:51 PM)
    Protect the wealthy at all costs is a direct translation of Paul’s tirade. These actions are sickening. Will our Congress close the loopholes that allow the wealthy individuals and corporations store untaxed money overseas and not pay a fair share here? Not while the GOP controls the House and have at least 41 votes in the Senate so they can set another record for filibusters.

    1. So I guess these people never go to H&R Block during tax season to find out how much they can “get back” from the government.

      Well, April 15 is a few weeks away. I guess it’s Civic Duty Time. No loopholes or exemptions for this guy. No siree bob!

      1. That’s different. Corporations aren’t people, as you would know if you weren’t a Koch astroturf rethuglican stooge.

      2. Really, these people can’t say they aren’t communists at the core, because it’s clear they see no moral flaw in the concept of all of our income going to the government for redistribution.

        1. I liked the commenter complaining that not all of the jobs Apple has created are in the US. So, you’re a nationalist as well as a socialist, are you?

          1. Two great hates that hate great together.

          2. A nationalist socialist?

            1. Fucking Social Nationalists. I hate Illinois Zinas.

              1. But Illinois Zimas are the worst. Seriously, who drinks that carbonated water?

                1. I think Zima gets a bad rap. Of all the alcopops, it was one of the better ones.

                  1. Zima was terrible, but the whole class of them are pretty terrible. I think if they didn’t have to be malt liquor because of stupid ABC regulations, they could be much better.

                    Of course, I also drank a can of margarita on AMTRAK, so what do I know?

                  2. I think Zima gets a bad rap. Of all the alcopops, it was one of the better ones.

                    True. There is a reason the game is not called “Bros ZIMAing Bros”

                  3. Zima, because zhit happens.

            2. A member of the National Socialist German American Workers Party?

          3. I see what you did there

    2. I love to watch them squirm when Rand breaks out the Liberty Logic.

      Yess….Good, I can feel your anger. … Let the hate flow through you.

    3. I’d love to propose a bit of legislation that anyone who uses the words “fair share” should have a 8″ spike driven into their head right between their eyes.

      1. 12″ spike. Then you can leave them nailed to the tree or wall behind them.

        1. I’ll accept that modification.

          1. The ayes have it – the measure is passed!

  16. Senator John McCain: Apple Is Cheating The U.S.A. In Taxes

    God, I love it when Rand bitch-slaps McCain in public. There may just be hope.

    1. and he’s so polite when he does it. Recall when McCain called him a whacko bird. Rand said he treats his colleagues with respect, but doesn’t always feel that respect is returned. A nice low key shiv between the ribs.

  17. It needs to be said over and over again:


    There is no such thing as a “technicality”. Something is either legal or it is not.

    1. Your right to say that, that’s a loophole in the tax code that needs to be closed.

      First rule about tax code: You don’t talk about tax code.

      1. But no for realsies, doesn’t your forehead vein just throb when some uncle rants about how the killer “got off on a technicality”?

        1. Damn that pesky “law.” If only we could just rule by feelings! /sic

        2. Yes, that’s one of the things I’ve had to explain more than once. Besides, it’s almost always bullshit, even accepting that view–how often does the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine actually result in someone walking?

          1. Not very often. This was part of my criminology course, and those “technicalities”, as well as the insanity defense, don’t get many people off. For the admissibility stuff, most cases are made by people (witnesses, etc.) and not material evidence. And the insanity plea is hardly used.

        3. That only really bugs me when the implication is that that is a problem with they system, rather than how it is supposed to work. Though it would be much better to say that he got off because the police or prosecutor fucked up.

          1. Which is exactly the case in 99.99999999999% of those situations.

        4. But no for realsies, doesn’t your forehead vein just throb when some uncle rants about how the killer “got off on a technicality”?

          You mean like exclusionary rules that are supposed to protect the public from police abuse (which they don’t btw) in exchange for letting obvious criminals go free (to go forth and vicitimize more members of the public)?

          1. I’d be fine with crucifixion as a disincentive.

      2. Or, if you do talk about it, make damn sure you have nothing left for the IRS to seize.

    2. agree. When govt cites a loophole they are citing their own incompetence at their only job…passing laws.

  18. I’m glad Rand Paul is in the Senate. He said what needed to be said to Apple: Please accept our apology.

  19. All the good little parasites and tax-lovers should give up all their Apple products right now. Just throw them in the trash or shut the fuck up.

    1. Can we have both?

      1. Yes. But only until they find a smartphone or a laptop or ereader made by a company is either a non-profit or pays taxes it doesn’t legally owe.

        1. No, I meant make them throw their shit away and have them shut the fuck up.

          1. Well, they have to get rid of Apple. They are stealing bread from the mouths of deliberately diverse and photogenic babies. It more than clear than anyone that owns an Apple product from this point onward is advocating the company’s actions.

            If you are against theft, throw your iPhone in the trash.

            1. No, no, no. Throw it over the White House gate, so that Obama can personally handle the transaction.

            2. If you are against theft, throw your iPhone in the trash.

              Don’t forget slavery, child labor, etc.

            3. Have you thrown yours out yet?

              1. Nope. I support theft and slavery. And out-sourcing. That’s what I tell the world by owning and using Apple products.

                1. Hey, don’t look at me, I fucking love child labor. The tiny hands are a wonderful bonus.

                2. Yes, my desire to hurl the iPad into a giant movie screen last night is diminished somewhat by this news.

                  1. How many times do you think you need to put yourself through Into Darkness, PL? Haven’t you suffered enough?

                    1. Jesus Christ, the number of real-live ST fans who feel the compulsion to put their balls in a meat grinder is just fascinating.

                      Just because it says Star Trek on the label doesn’t mean you have to eat it you dumb shits! I know it’s going to be bad; you know it’s going to be bad; Abrams is overrated and Paramount is laughing all the way to the bank.

                    2. I read a review of it, and it sounds godawful. And totally thrown together.

                    3. I know it’s going to be bad; you know it’s going to be bad; Abrams is overrated and Paramount is laughing all the way to the bank.

                      Why was the first one so good then?

                    4. Fuck you, Francisco.

                      No, seriously, if you liked 2Star 2Trek, then you are one of the Dumb. The first Star Trek was practically a Michael Bay movie.

                    5. What didn’t you like about it?

                      I thought it was immensely entertaining and remade all the characters in their own images. Left the theater with a huge smile on my face (which is the ONLY criteria one should use to judge a film).

                      And I don’t know, or care, who Abrams or Michael Bay are.

                    6. well, I guess if it was entertaining then who cares if the plot made no sense, the science makes no sense, the character development sucked and the “remake” was naked pandering + exaggerating the characters’ famous characteristics to an absurd level?

                      It was FUN! That excuses all schlock.

                      if I wanted that kind of fun i would just watch porn.

                    7. I mean, let me rattle off a few of the problems:

                      – They gave a cadet command of the flagship of the fleet. A cadet.
                      – Apparently red matter has to be in the center of a planet to work. Or not
                      – Apparently one supernova-ing star can wreck an entire galaxy
                      – Nero has the ability to save his planet, but instead sits around for 30 years just to ruin Spock’s day
                      – Unnecessary romance between Uhura and Spock. Seriously, not even within the realm of possibility for those characters.
                      – Kobayashi Maru sequence exceptionally annoying. Oh ha ha look he’s eating an apple.

                    8. I mean, let me rattle off a few of the problems:

                      Yeah, but you had no problems with Sulu and Chekov rocking from side to side? The odds of another planet evolving in parallel with ours to the point of writing the same Constitution, yet they fought a hot cold war? A holodeck exists and nobody is using it to fuck? Tachyon fields that can cure the common cold?

                      Could it be your expectations are just a little too high?

                    9. Why was the first one so good then?

                      My head just exploded.

                    10. I thought that was your ass.

                    11. If I were in control of things, we’d just have the Kindle Fire. But I was pressed to acquire the iPad.

                    12. It’s funny, I saw your comment and Auric’s both, and it took me a while to realize you were talking about the new Super Star Trek Baby Geniuses movie. I must really have a mental block.

                      I’ll add that to my list of movies I’m not watching.

                    13. Incidentally, the “throw it at the movie screen” comment was a reference to the old Apple 1984 commercial, which today has irony beyond comprehension.

                    14. That ad is older than me.

                    15. Well, that’s good, because it’s dumber than me.

                3. I outsourced my slave trading to the orphans of the Somalian pirates that Seal Team 6 whacked. Plus some Mexican kids whose parents were killed in Fast and Furious.

                  They all have iPhones, iPads and Macs. I use a Dell w/Windows – cause I fucking hated Steve Jobs and all the Steve Jobs love.

                  Hey – it’s a free country.

                  *cracks whip at slave children*

            4. They are stealing bread from the mouths of deliberately diverse and photogenic babies.

              I’m gonna call it — SF won the thread with this one.

              Oh, and sorry about the thing I said a week or so that got you upset. It was meant to be funny and teasing, but sometimes that just comes across as dickish.

              1. Oh, and sorry about the thing I said a week or so that got you upset.

                I am pretty un-upsettable. I probably replied with too-convincing mock outrage.

    2. It’s really funny how much Apple’s market still skews to the “corporations are bad” crowd. Apple does pretty much everything they don’t like about corporations. Offshore manufacturing, clever tax compliance, planned obsolescence of products, making huge profits, etc. Which is just fucking brilliant of Apple.

      1. Apple probably just quit lining the donation coffers of the DNC since Jobs croaked, which is probably the only reason for the bullshit they’re being forced to endure right now.

        1. I never liked Apple nor Jobs, but I always had to give him credit for being a brilliant marketer and a dedicated capitalist. The man didn’t like to part with any dollar that he didn’t have to.

          1. I feel the same way. I hate apple’s shit purely on personal preference; however, Jobs was a fucking genius. I also admire the perseverance he had for failing sooo many times yet still kept on going.

            1. I hate apple’s shit purely on personal preference

              Same here. I suffered at the hands of Apple zealots for years on listserves and forums, and I vowed to them that I’d never send one thin fucking dime to that company, just out of spite to them.

          2. No, I don’t care for Apple, but they’ve positioned themselves very well as a luxury brand, which is what they really are.

            It’s interesting that lefties latch on to companies like Apple and Whole Foods, neither of which at all conforms to their idea of morality.

            1. They don’t have any morality, ProL. Don’t make the mistake of thinking they do.

              1. By my standards, many don’t. Of course, like many people, they don’t understand the implications of their political views and their personal.

                It’s like you being an anarchist but having all of those slaves in your basement.

                1. Its not like its a government oppressing all those basement slaves.

                  1. That’s a good question–what’s worse, Episiarch or the federal government?

          3. I do know that he once called the CEO of my software company to ask him to reinstate MAC support.

      2. planned obsolescence of products

        That and the lack of customization is the reason why I own absolutely none of their products. But, obviously, I am not their targeted customer base, too much a DIYfer.

        1. planned obsolescence of products

          As if the electronics produced today won’t be obsolete in 2 years…

          1. Like my trusty IBM XT with 10 MEG of disc space and 512K of memory isn’t sufficient….pfffft. You can have your iDerps! Me and my XT are just fine….

            /Mrs. Haversham

          2. “As if the electronics produced today won’t be obsolete in 2 years…”

            If you buy a laptop today, that’s both new AND obsolete in 2 years, you’re an imbecile.

            I don’t even understand how that would be possible.

        2. I’m not much of a fan of their products either. Though I do like Macs for various reasons.

      3. Never underestimate the power of doublethink.

      4. I love when people bitch about the Microsoft “monopoly” but don’t say the first word about Apple’s actual monopoly.

        1. but don’t say the first word about Apple’s actual monopoly.

          Come on Sparky, apple has nothing -close- to a monopoly. They’re in the *most* competitive business, aside for maybe food service.

          1. If you open an Apple product they will never support it. If you modify an Apple product they will never support it. If you do anything except what Apple says you’re allowed to do with an Apple product they will never support it. As far as I’m concerned if anyone has a monopoly it’s Apple.

            1. That still isn’t a monopoly.

              Now, what I will say is that if Microsoft can get busted for bundling Windows and IE, then Apple should be busted* for bundling their OS’s and Safari.

              * – for fairness sake. SLD applies.

              1. That still isn’t a monopoly.

                I know it’s not a real monopoly, but it damn well should be. Fuck Apple and all the fuckers that slobber all over them. The point is that if Microsoft was determined by the government to be a monopoly then Apple is miles past that point.

                1. “The point is that if Microsoft was determined by the government to be a monopoly then Apple is miles past that point.”

                  And you tried to make that point by saying something about Apple not supporting modded products.

                  Make your point with things that make your point.

                  1. Microsoft was labeled a monopoly for bundling IE with Windows. Apple does the following without suffering the label:

                    Apple bundles a web browser with their OS.
                    Music downloaded through the iTunes store can only be played by Apple products.
                    iPhone apps can only be obtained through the Apple App Store.
                    It has been ruled that you can’t even make a devices that looks similar to an Apple device.

                    1. This point, Sparky, I agree with. But it is honestly tangential to your original.

                    2. But it is honestly tangential to your original.

                      If Microsoft is a monopoly because the government said so based on one of their practices, then Apple is also a monopoly that just hasn’t been labeled as such yet.

                    3. Music downloaded through the iTunes store can only be played by Apple products.


                    4. Nonsense.

                      Tell me, wise one, what else I may use.

                    5. They’re just .m4a files, which will play in Windows Media Player, on Zunes, on Androids, and many others. They can also be easily converted to mp3.

                    6. Music downloaded through the iTunes store can only be played by Apple products.

                      Nope. They’re ordinary m4a files, and it was Apple that convinced the RIAA to sell them without DRM.


                2. Microsoft had a 90%+ market share of microcomputer operating systems, and they routinely used that monopoly to exclude potential competitors from other markets. The highest market share Apple ever had with the Mac was around 20%. They had a near-monopoly on tablet computers for a short while, because it took a year or two for the knock-offs to show up.


            2. So Apple has a monopoly on Apple products then? I don’t know if monopoly is quite the right word there. But I agree that the closed platform shit is obnoxious. Which is why I’ll never buy any Apple product other than Mac. And I probably won’t buy another Mac either. I really don’t like their trend toward sealing everything up (you used to be able to change the battery or upgrade memory yourself) and having fewer an tinier connections for peripherals on each new model. I want a DVD drive and USB, Firewire and network ports that normal cables can connect to FFS.

            3. If you open an Apple product they will never support it.

              Not true. Many products include instructions for adding RAM, switching hard drives, etc.

        2. One of my peeves is how the word “monopoly” has become a synonym for “big company”. Words used to have meanings.

      5. Well, and not only that, but didn’t Steve Jobs go to the county school board and say fuck off I pay you enough already?

        That puts him in Koch territory.

        The reason, of course, Jobs appeals to the lefty hipster crowd is image. The Kochs make paper and oil. Jobs made beveled edges. Oooh, shiny…

        1. I could swear I heard he pretty much eschewed charities and the like altogether. Unlike the Kochs. I might be wrong about that, but it sounds like him.

          1. I should have said that “puts him in Koch territory” in terms of how he should be viewed by the Left. Jobs did everything the Left *thinks* the Koch Brothers do. But it’s all about style.

            1. I’m not sure whether I’m right about that point–your comment just brought it to mind. If true, it’s typical–love the bad guy who pretends to share your values; hate the better guy who actually does good things.

            2. Koch industries is generally known to treat their employees incredibly well, they donates to charity, support the ACLU and other civil liberties organizations, and their environmental record is actually pretty good for an oil company…

              …Koch industries is everything they should like about a company.

        2. “Jobs made beveled edges”

          And patented rectangular things, apparently.

      6. planned obsolescence of products

        I wouldn’t even call it planned obsolescence. I have an iPod I bought in 2006 that I still use, and it works great (as long as it’s plugged in, the batteries are pretty much useless now).

        Apple’s marketing genius was targeting a subsection of insecure, status-chasing SWPLs, exploiting their feelings of social alienation with the “Think Different” campaign, and making them feel like they HAD to buy a slightly different version of the same product every year.

        1. You can get a replacement battery for that iPod that is considerably more powerful than those available in 2006.


          1. I don’t feel like sending it back to Apple for them to switch it out–that’s just pointless. Their biggest weakness is that it won’t allow me to do something as simple as change a damn battery.

            1. You don’t have to send it to Apple, there’s at least a dozen vendors that will do it for you with a one-day turnaround.

              The reason the battery isn’t removable without tools is that Apple made the design tradeoff of more capacity in a given size than they’d have if the enclosure had to have a removable door, spring contacts, etc.


      7. “Apple does pretty much everything they don’t like about corporations.”

        What? They sell overpriced shit that says “I’m richer than you.” They live for that shit.

  20. Fear will keep the locals in line; Fear of this tax code.

  21. Fuck you to all you Texans who didnt elect Ron Paul to the Senate.

    Not that Gramm was a horrible backup choice, but still.

    1. Wait, didn’t he drop out entirely after the 2012 campaign?

      1. I was talking about back in 1984 or 1982 or whenever it was.

  22. Every week another little piece of evidence surfaces that John McCain is a senile old gas-bag.

  23. You people just cannot resist playing the sockpuppet’s game, can you?

    1. Episiarch occasionally says something useful.

      1. Useful?!?

        1. sock???!???

          I thought you were sockless!

          1. Sockless as Don Johnson.

            1. +1 RayBan Wayfarer

        2. The only thing I find more amusing than those interacting with Tony, are those that are so CERTAIN he’s a sock.

          1. There are only three possibilities:

            Tony is real and after years of coming here is still so stupid about what we believe that he says stupid shit like on this thread.

            Tony is “real” and is just a piece of shit troll.

            Tony is a sockpuppet of someone that thinks it’s funny to troll us with a idiot liberal sockpuppet.

            I find the third one much more likely, but really any one of them means he’s not worth doing anything with but insulting him.

            1. Am I the only one that believes the first possibility is the most likely?

              People without a shred of intellectual honesty really do exist.

              1. “Without a shred of intellectual honesty” is possibility 2.

                1 is the idea that he is so stupid that he thinks any of his nonsense is going to change our minds.

                The most charitable possible interpretation is that might started as 1 and became a 2 because he realized he got off on it.

                Personally I think he was always a 2, but that Tony left years ago and “Tony” is a 3 through and through.

            2. I think it’s a combination of doors #1 and #2: Tony is real and after years of coming here is still so stupidly smug about what he believes that he says stupid shit just to troll us.

            3. a. He sounds EXACTLY like the commenters at HuffPo/Jezebel… No reason he can’t be as stupid as them.

              b. He’s come back, several times, to dead threads to argue with posts many hours old. A Sock exists for attention and wouldn’t revisit a dead thread.

              Is it possible he’s a sock? Sure. I think it unlikely.

            4. Isn’t there a “Tony” and a “T o n y” (< spaces)?

              Maybe one is real and the other a sockpuppet.

              1. The Tony/T o n y thing also makes me think it’s a sock. While whomever was off posting under their regular handle or some other troll handle “Tony” got jacked and it had to run as T o n y for a few weeks.

            5. Tony is real and after years of coming here is still so stupid about what we believe that he says stupid shit like on this thread.

              Do a quick scan of the postings on any given day at mongoloid pit moshes such as Kos, DU, HuffPo, BalloonJuice, etc., etc., and tell me why that isn’t an entirely plausible scenario.

  24. My brother is a frustrated entrepreneur (fingers in a number of pies, all of them lukewarm), yet when we discuss tax burdens he insists that he looks forward to paying his “fair share” as the cost for doing business in the United States. However bilious it makes me feel, I know what he means at heart: high taxes are a good problem to have, and he’d prefer paying 40% in a higher bracket than 25% in a lower one.

    Fine. I’ll concede that one. But he’s strangely quiet when I ask whether he’ll still itemize his deductions, or make voluntary contributions above his burden. Because he knows that his “fair share” is the lowest sum the IRS will let him get away with paying.

    1. And thinking like that is highly correlated with “never making that kind of money, cause people who get rich don’t think like that”. In general…

    2. Here is the question I always ask people who say shit like this:

      If there were a lottery in the US, and each year the winners of that lottery had to pay zero taxes, and you won that lottery, would you pay your taxes that year?

      Watch the squirming commence when you ask that question. Because if they say they would still pay their taxes, everyone in the room knows they are lying. And if they admit they won’t, you just annihilated them. It’s the perfect question.

      1. each year the winners of that lottery had to pay zero taxes

        So IOW my taxes are zero…so….YES! I’d pay my no taxes!!

        Wait…I’m not doing it right, am I….

    3. Itemize his deductions? He won’t even deduct his business expenses!

  25. The time of this well rehearsed speech is 4:20…

    What you did there, Rand? I see it.

  26. In the world of McCain and Levin, how does a company even figure out how much it owes in taxes? Since apparently following the law is not good enough, how do they guess at what additional rules they are supposed to follow?

    1. Send all of your net profit to the government, let them assess who needs the money the most, then get back whatever they think is right.

      1. That is, in fact, what they mean.

        What they say is something like

        “We just want corporations to pay their fair share!”

    2. I think they are confusing paying taxes with paying the bill for your meal. There’s what you owe plus 10-20% depending on how big of an asshole you want to like in front of your friends.

      Oh, and the government always gives good service. ALWAYS.

      1. Well, if I understand things correctly, the government gets most of its money from the future or the aether, so I don’t see why they need my money at all.

  27. All I have to say to all this Apple talk is…


  28. “Paul’s comments were reminiscent of Rep. Joe Barton’s (R-Texas) apology to BP for a government “shakedown” following the company’s massive Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010.”

    Yeah, legally paying every tax penny you owe is just like a major oil well failure.

    Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/hilli…..z2TxX96iwD
    Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.