Facebook pay no Corporation Tax AGAIN

[CamMoreRon]

sidicks said:

To be honest £120k for well qualified specialised people isn't that high. I guess it just seems high to you as you don't have useful skills that people are prepared to pay for??

ETA

Play nicely now or lose your posting rights on the thread.

Edited by Big Al. on Wednesday 29th October 18:02

[CamMoreRon]

sidicks said:

Nice.

Once again, you appear to be extremely ignorant about how a discussion works.

You are the one making random claims, contradicting what has reported about staff costs for Facebook (UK). Either you've got some evidence to support your claims (in which case we can review to see whether your claims stack up) or you haven't. The latter is most likely, based on past experience.

Also complete and utter garbage.

I've been through quite a number of your posts and noticed that you are incapable of writing any more than 1 short sentence unless you're making a personal insult.

You say I don't understand how a discussion works..

[CamMoreRon]

sidicks said:

How? Why?

What evidence do you have to suggest otherwise...?
(Presumably none. Again)

I just don't trust people who earn that sort of money to be honest with it. When you read some of the rants from people earning large salaries about how they're sick of propping up the country / paying for the sick / supporting the needy etc etc.. it doesn't surprise me in the least when I learn that they're engaged in all sorts of tax abuse behaviours.

[CamMoreRon]

sidicks said:

Nice. You don't like being proved wrong, do you?!

As I've said before, I'm perfectly happy to be proved wrong when somebody takes the time to EXPLAIN why.

What I don't like is people like you who are incapable of taking that small step, and just rely on pettiness, petulance, and insults. I would hazard a guess at it being because you don't know what you're talking about, and just sit there hoping someone comes along who does.

[CamMoreRon]

sidicks said:

Finally we get to the truth - ignorance and jealousy about those that earn (much) more than you.

Thanks for confirming what I previously suspected.

Hahaha paranoia.. thy name is.. Sid of the Dicks.

[CamMoreRon]

sidicks said:

CamMoreRon said:

I would hazard a guess at it being because you don't know what you're talking about, and just sit there hoping someone comes along who does.

Once again your wild guesses are woefully inaccurate.

Then prove it.

It will be difficult, when almost all of your posts are less than 10 words long. It probably wastes more of your time to sit there arguing with me than it would for you to write something constructive.

I think until I'm proved otherwise, the verdict is you don't know what you're talking about and therefore have no contribution to make.

[CamMoreRon]

Ok I will try a change of tact..

Sid, can you (and only you) take a few minutes of your time to explain in terms (that given your assumption of my comprehension / intellect) I will understand, exactly how Facebook has reduced their tax burden on sales estimated at £223 million down to zero?

You have a chance to convince me you are right, and that you know what you're talking about - a chance to prove my assumption of you wrong. If your construct your argument in a constructive manner and use objective information then I will have no choice but to listen to you.

Otherwise, we will just continue to argue for another 10 pages.

Please - nobody help him. I want to hear it from him, and only him.

(Waits)

[CamMoreRon]

TankRizzo said:

CamMoreRon said:

Hahaha paranoia.. thy name is.. Sid of the Dicks.

CamMoreRon said:

What I don't like is people like you who are incapable of taking that small step, and just rely on pettiness, petulance, and insults.

Yeah I could select any two quotes and have it mean whatever I want it to. Insulting him is a last resort, when all other methods of trying to have a reasonable discussion have failed. (Usually after the first one of his replies)

Anyway.. I'll be back later, hopefully he will have written something worth reading by then.

[CamMoreRon]

fblm said:

FB's global 7000 thousand employees median basic pay is $112,000. Throw in some management types and it would hardly be a surprise to learn those 'little sweat shop', 'computer geeks' in the UK average 120 quid basic would it? You just can't stand the thought of people earning so much can you? Your posts drip with envy. Pathetic.

You can sit there and assume my dislike of people selfish enough to try and shirk their responsibility to society is born of jealousy, it doesn't bother me. I honestly couldn't care less what anyone with that attitude thinks. About anything.

People can earn whatever.. that doesn't bother me. It only bothers me when people get selfish, and greedy, and start crying because the mean old government wants too many of their sweeties.

Still waiting for Sid's analysis. It's taking him a while.. so I assume it's going to be a good read.

[CamMoreRon]

fblm said:

CamMoreRon said:

You can sit there and assume my dislike of people selfish enough to try and shirk their responsibility to society is born of jealousy, it doesn't bother me.

Jesus you are muddled in the head! Do you now accept that facebook are probably not lying about their wage bill and that those 'computer geeks' are paid ten times what you make? Have you now changed tack and are attacking those 'computer geeks' as selfish and shirking their responsibility to society? Individually of course they probably pay 20 times more income tax than you. How many of FB's 'computer geeks' do you think are responsible for accounting and tax compliance? If indeed the employees do reap the benefits of corporate tax avoidance then do you now agree that CT is a tax on employees? These are rhetorical questions, or more accurately, I just don't care if you get it yet.

And lastly if thats you in the video with the stupid facial hair and jean shorts, who the fvck are you to be calling anyone a geek?

Actually it's a fairly simple moral objection - no muddling necessary.

The reason I brought up "computer geeks" was not to attack them, it was out of a doubt that those guys would have been given the lion's share of profits. If you have something to show what the average wage one of those guys was making then I will shut my mouth and take it back, but knowing several people on the working level of social media the pay certainly isn't £100k+.

I'm happy for anyone to call me a geek, although I would actually prefer the word nerd; but FYI jean shorts were quite fashionable amongst the younger generation this summer, as were facial hair and skinny jeans.

sidicks said:

You'll be waiting a long time. I tend not to waste my time helping people who insult me!

Translation: I have nothing constructive to add and / or do not know what I'm talking about.

[CamMoreRon]

London424 said:

Here you go CamMoreRon...just signed today.

http://www.nasdaq.com/article/fifty-countries-to-s...

Well this is good news.

[CamMoreRon]

fblm said:

Oh dear.

Oh dear.

[CamMoreRon]

sidicks said:

CamMoreRon said:

What I don't like is people like you who are incapable of taking that small step, and just rely on pettiness, petulance, and insults.

I think that you might like to re-read the thread and work out how(sic) is the one making the insults!

Just re-read the beginning.. seems the winner is BGARK, getting his first insult in on the 2nd page, closely followed by turbobloke. Before that it was actually a good discussion.

[CamMoreRon]

Article said:

part of a multiyear effort pushed by austerity-hit countries such as the U.K, France and Germany to clamp down on tax evasion and avoidance by companies and individuals.

Seems it should help both. Mmm.. transparency.