• BigBenis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m so sick of companies taking every opportunity to be egregiously shitty in the name of profit.

    • SLVRDRGN@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m equally sick of pretty much every sports stadium, event venue, theme park, cruise ship, etc. offering these companies’ beverages and all the consumers in the world that really don’t withhold from supporting these companies, despite their obvious shittiness.

    • jorp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      These are the incentives of the economic system. Are you up for radical change? We can’t rely on companies choosing to be moral and nice.

      We need workers to own the economy.

      • psud@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        We need workers to own the economy

        We need an economic system that rewards acting in the common good. This system, but with the workers in charge is still this system which rewards all the bad stuff of modern capitalism

        • jorp@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          A single owner-dictator is less likely to make decisions for the common good than all employees owning their workplaces together.

          Socialism, however it’s implemented (besides state capitalism a la China, which also isn’t socialist), necessarily moves us closer to what you’re saying.

      • Taleya@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        You know there’s a range of options between unfettered capitalism and unfettered communism right?

        Slap communism on a population that’s spent the past few generations training itself to reward cunts and you get the USSR on steroids.

      • Time@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I understand the value here, but I prefer to keep control over my business decisions. If employees are interested in having more influence, they should consider starting their own ventures. I believe maintaining direct control allows me to steer my business according to my vision and goals.

        • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Since they are giving up all of that control to you. You must be giving them most of the profits then right? Right? That would only be fair.

          Or do you think you deserve more than them somehow because you had money to start a business and they only had skills and knowledge?

          • Time@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I started this business, taught the skills, and make the financial decisions based on what I think is best for the company. I value their input, but the final decisions are up to me since my name is on the line.

            Again, if that doesn’t seem fair, maybe consider starting your own business.

            • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              So you do think you deserve more then lol

              Making financial decisions isn’t a hard job dude. Every grown person is expected to do that in life.Your big benefit was that you had the capital to start the business. That’s why it’s called capitalism. The people with the money like you are like modern day lords. Only living off the privilege of having money when others don’t.

              I would gladly start my business if I already had enough capital for it. But I need healthcare for my family and for some reason that is tied to my job, making it an insurmountable expense. Maybe that reason is to keep me working for oblivious people like you, instead of myself.

              • Time@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                You don’t know how I started my business. I had only $300-$400 in capital while collecting unemployment, so don’t assume I had a lot of money. Making financial decisions isn’t easy when you’re broke.

                As for free healthcare, you don’t need to change the entire economic system. Advocate for better policies and vote for leaders who will work to make it happen.

                • jorp@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Yes you’re describing how capitalism works. Maybe you feel that you took a big risk and it paid off.

                  The risk you took was the risk of losing your capital.

                  There are many people out there who would not even notice that same amount of capital missing from their accounts.

                  That’s the thing with systemic problems. It doesn’t mean everyone participating in the system is causing those problems, it means the system results in those outcomes. Systemic racism doesn’t mean everyone with authority is racist, systemic inequality under capitalism doesn’t mean every business owner has a private jet.

                  Maybe you think you’re “a good capitalist” just like maybe you think there are good cops. That doesn’t mean capitalism and policing aren’t systemically problematic.

                  We need to destroy the system and that means getting rid of people like you too, whether or not you think you’re justified in skimming wealth from your employees because you were poor once.

        • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          understand the value here. However, I prefer to keep control over my country’s decisions. If citizens are interested in having more influence, they should consider founding their own country. I believe maintaining direct control allows me to steer my country according to my vision and goals.

          • jorp@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Democracy has been tried and failed, just recently France tried it again and reverted to Empire. If you don’t like where you are a subject, simply conquer some other territory. Let’s just reform monarchy.

        • jorp@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Yes being a petite dictator is nice for you and nobody disputes that. Your ownership and profit comes at their expense.

  • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    The fact that there are so many legal loopholes to use to save from paying taxes, the fact they go this far to avoid taxes is disgusting.

    • Etterra@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Fun fact, most laws are written by the corporations to which they apply. There’s no possible way for politicians to actually write all of the laws, so they rely on their corporate paymasters lobbyists to go ahead and write them, then have their staff skim through it all, and then sign off on it before it goes off to the chamber for a vote.

    • ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      When you’re a billion dollar company, It’s cheaper to bribe politicians than it is to pay taxes.

      There’s a supreme Court judge right now who was giving companies favorable laws for like a pack of twizzlers.

    • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      it is just an inevitable consequence of money and lobby based politics. Whoever contributed to turn US elections into something like a pro wrestling match event is to blame

    • Whelks_chance@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I wish they’d pay the taxes in the country the drinks were bought. Even if the US manages to scrape back some, that’s only one country seeing the taxes owed.

  • RoyaltyInTraining@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    So, now that the US has 16 billion more dollars than they planned for, surely they can cancel all student loan debt and build affordable housing, right? They won’t just throw it at military contractors and directly redistribute it back to the wealthy, right???

    • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      So you’re kinda right and kinda not.

      Roughly what actually happens in cases of massive back-taxes likes this is that the movement of funds is tracked back through to the municipalities where they initially failed to pay. From there the actual unpaid amounts are calculated for each level, then priority weighting is assigned (if the total sum was reduced to less than the delinquent payment), then the repayment schedule is calculated for each municipality, and finally the IRS takes the cost of remediation investigation from the top (probably about 1.5 mil for this one) and begins repayment.

      That ‘repayment schedule’ means that the funds not immediately disbursed can be loaned out (most often to other government agencies) (there’s a term for the specific kind of loan this is, it’s very short term but I am totally blanking on the name). Funds are usually given out at the next funding cycle unless there’s a claim made for immediate funding, and from there it’s just folded into the budget and assigned however that municipality / organization handles budget allocation.

      TL;DR: Biden admin can’t have the funds directly except in emergencies, that would be constitutional overstep. It just goes back to the government at the next budget assignment. Which you can draw your own conclusions about where Congress will put that additional money.

    • AShadyRaven@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      don’t be silly

      it’ll get appealed and fought over and over until it’s down to 600 million

      they’ll pay back 300 and we wont hear anything else about it for years until someone mentions Clarence Thomas getting a new 300 million dollar golden calf statue around the same time

      • psmgx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Your crazy if you think Clarence is getting $300M. Studies have shown lobbying works for shocking little sums of money. Couple of first class tickets to a resort and a month there, easily under $30K.

  • Realitaetsverlust@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    If a government or a corporation has 16 billion dollars, is completely inconsequential to me. I don’t see anything of either

    • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      That is a valid take. It also a sign that the current system isn’t working.

      The people should be in control of the government and the government should spend money on its people.

      Unfortunately, that isn’t the case right now. We need to work together to fix this.

      • Realitaetsverlust@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Jup. Governments are way too large for their own good, gets involved in way too many private matters and is insanely expensive. We need to drastically downsize the entire thing and have it focussed on their core job again.

        • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I would disagree, I think governments could stand to get bigger. Tax the wealthy more to close the income gap and get single payer healthcare, so our healthcare isn’t tied to our jobs.

    • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Did you drive anywhere on a road today? If so you’ve already been given more from public spending than you will ever get from Coca Cola.

      Government money does a lot of really important things. If you want those things to better reflect your priorities then you need to get more involved in the process (especially at the municipal level, where you will see the most direct impact from government spending).

      • Realitaetsverlust@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        No doubt that it does. However, pretending like the world would be a perfect place if those darn corporations would just pay all their taxes is foolish.

        • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          No one did. You just invented that in your head so you could get mad about it.

          Making giant corporations pay their taxes is one tiny piece of a very large puzzle. But you need every piece to finish a puzzle.

    • jaemo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      You are part of why Elon Musk et al can exist.

      You do not know your enemy when you see or hear them.

      • Realitaetsverlust@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Elon Musk is not my enemy. The fact that billionaires got a massive pile of money doesn’ylt affect me in the slightest.

        You know what does affect me? Corrupt government officials that embezzle public funds, spend it on stupid projects that only enrich their friends and families. That affects me.

        You really think that giving the government access to even more money will help you? Hell no. It’s going to end up in the same hands as now, just more of it.

        Taxes are a borderline infinite money source, and if you don’t have to worry about s source drying up you start wasting it, which is exactly what’s happening in many countries now.

    • espentan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      You’re not going to believe this, but it turns out that no one knew this was happening - they’re all completely innocent! As long as they promise not to do anything immoral ever again, they’re fine. /s

  • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Coca-Cola is an evil company, so I’m not surprised. All they had to do was make cola, and be cool. Instead they operated like a criminal cartel, murdered labor activists in third world countries, exploited workers, bribed politicians, and evaded taxes. They should crumble under the weight of their crimes. If the government bails them out then we should all protest heavily.

    • primrosepathspeedrun@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think it would be fair to destroy product you see in stores. something to weaken plastic on the outside of bottles, or shaking them. things that make product unsellable, or make it make a mess.

      these companies are beyond evil, clearly simple “im not buying this” doesn’t work; retailers must be punished for stocking this shit.

        • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Some retail stores now operate on a model where they essentially rent shelf space to wholesalers, who are responsible for stocking the shelves and keep all the money from sales of their product.

            • primrosepathspeedrun@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              see, reducing demand at a retailer level is a lot easier to democratize and give kids to do so they feel empowered. plus it makes them think about OTHER products that are associated with awful shit. maybe, someday, I could even go grocery shopping without having to google every single god damn thing I put in my cart!

      • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Your motivation is honorable, but this plan would only impact innocent retail employees and would not hurt Coca-Cola at all. I like your initiative, though.

  • Freefall@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I am sure they totally haven’t made any money off the taxes they didn’t pay. I’d love to steal a million dollars and only get fined a million dollars 10 years later!