Starbucks paid less than 3% tax on £8 billion.

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by colin42

Originally posted by lambros56

Originally posted by gladtobehere
reply to post by lambros56
 

At the end of the day, the government is to blame.

Whether its the tax loop holes or run away spending.

THEY spend and borrow like crazy, then stick us with the bill.



I agree
That's my point.
The government are criminal.
I was watching Max Keiser this morning and a guy was telling him that the government had blocked all criminal procedures against the City of London banksters.

We need a revolution.
Nope wrong. We are to blame. Look in the window of any starbucks tomorrow and it will be full of people buying expensive coffee served by a person on mimimum wage.

Stop spending your money in starbucks and then they will make no profit in reality instead of on paper.



Well they really dont need to be paying minimum wage, they could pay more.

Other than that I dont have a problem with 3%. They pay all sorts of other taxes and the holders pay tax on their profit. Plus they keep folks working all down the line from the bean fields on.




posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wildbob77
How many people were employed ?

Sometimes it's better to have people have jobs then to worry about a corporation paying enough tax.

If you taxed them at what you might consider a fair rate, perhaps they wouldn't have opened so many stores and employed so many people.


Then the people would be employed by a smaller business that does pay tax but isn't able to grow right now because they have global corporation able to pump their unpaid tax back into building another branch to destroy more of the smaller businesses...

Having three independent coffee houses in a town centre would employ more than one Starbucks, and those three would be paying their taxes, rather than pumping the money out of the country and into a tax haven to be hoarded by CEO's. They would also be paying back into the local economy, because they are local businesses.

People seem to forget the capitalist idea of competition in a natural market, but maybe that's because we haven't ever had a truly capitalist competitive market. Corruption with leadership destroys competition and enterprise.

If Wal Mart didn't exist, do you think people would just stop needing things? Do you think no one else would think to open a shop ever again?

If Wal Mart closed down tomorrow, ten new businesses would open up in a week to take their place. The people employed now by Wal Mart would get jobs in one of those ten new businesses, probably paid more, valued more, paying more tax, with the small business paying their taxes too, and not rushing the profits out of the state and out of the country. The money would remain in the community, as the small business owner employs the local plumber, the local painter, buys stock from a local farmer...

This is local economics, something the global corporation has destroyed. Right now there is a continuous extraction of wealth from communities as corporations only pay back a minuscule % in pay back to their local employees, the rest is funnelled out of the community. It's a major part of the problem we face, and something that needs to be fixed urgently.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Logarock
 



Well they really dont need to be paying minimum wage, they could pay more.

Other than that I dont have a problem with 3%. They pay all sorts of other taxes and the holders pay tax on their profit. Plus they keep folks working all down the line from the bean fields on.
And put smaller coffee shops out of business that don’t pay minimum wage and do pay their taxes.

Seems we have a society where some are too big to fail and others too big to pay. Best leave that to the little guy.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 
Agreed. Also these big multinationals need to pay tons of money to their shareholders rather than the taxman whereas smaller shops/chains do not have share holders.

If you look at Starbucks share price and how they boast of big profits to the shareholders the two stories dont match.

Appears they dont only roast coffee they also cook books.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by colin42
reply to post by Logarock
 



Well they really dont need to be paying minimum wage, they could pay more.

Other than that I dont have a problem with 3%. They pay all sorts of other taxes and the holders pay tax on their profit. Plus they keep folks working all down the line from the bean fields on.
And put smaller coffee shops out of business that don’t pay minimum wage and do pay their taxes.

Seems we have a society where some are too big to fail and others too big to pay. Best leave that to the little guy.




Around here we dont have such a thing as small coffee shops. Dunkin Donuts put them all out in the 80's.


But really the market for coffee comes down to White Castle, Tim Hortons, Speedway, Micky Dee's and then up to the better shops. Some fule chains got into coffee. The only small coffee shops were small dinners years back. There werent any specialty coffee shops. The big heavy hitters have been running the takeout/sit in coffee bizz around here for years.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock

Originally posted by colin42

Originally posted by lambros56

Originally posted by gladtobehere
reply to post by lambros56
 

At the end of the day, the government is to blame.

Whether its the tax loop holes or run away spending.

THEY spend and borrow like crazy, then stick us with the bill.



I agree
That's my point.
The government are criminal.
I was watching Max Keiser this morning and a guy was telling him that the government had blocked all criminal procedures against the City of London banksters.

We need a revolution.
Nope wrong. We are to blame. Look in the window of any starbucks tomorrow and it will be full of people buying expensive coffee served by a person on mimimum wage.

Stop spending your money in starbucks and then they will make no profit in reality instead of on paper.



Well they really dont need to be paying minimum wage, they could pay more.

Other than that I dont have a problem with 3%. They pay all sorts of other taxes and the holders pay tax on their profit. Plus they keep folks working all down the line from the bean fields on.




It doesn`t matter which way you put it.
So they pay all sorts of other taxes.
Don`t we all.
The ones who work for them pay all sorts of other taxes along with the higher tax they pay than their employers pay.





top topics
 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join