Hacker News Reader

Comment by zepto | Hacker News Reader

Whilst I agree that no American benefits if Apple fails, it’s not surprising that Americans no longer celebrate the success of American businesses.

The economy is demonstrably structured so that only a small number benefit, whilst income has been stagnant for generations, and living standards have been declining because of rising healthcare costs.

Bringing down Apple may benefit nobody, but there is no longer any reason for most Americans to care about the success of American businesses since they can’t share in the prosperity.

View on HN

"Bringing down Apple may benefit nobody, but there is no longer any reason for Americans to care about the success of American businesses since they don’t share in the prosperity."

Precisely. Many Fortune 100 US companies took the vast majority of their tax windfall/oversea cash and bought back the stock. Before you say most Americans own 401K's and have benefited from this - the relative increase in 401K's is dwarfed by the increase in housing prices and general inflation. Most Americans have experience single digit wage growth since the early 1980s, while the cost of pretty much everything has increased by double digits.

Most Americans are worse off today (from an earnings standpoint once you normalize it for inflation and purchasing power) than they were 30 years ago.

I think we're worse off from the standpoint of financial independence and ability to grow wealth, yes. Ability to pay for things like education and health care, yes.

I think the reason this isn't more obvious is that technology has improved so rapidly that for just a few thousand dollars... maybe 5% of the average household's income, we can buy really fantastic technology products compared to previous generations. So these gadgets are helping to partially compensate for the loss of so much real wealth.

Even top-10% software engineers making $300k total compensation are really just achieving what I'd consider "normal slightly-upper middle class financial comfort". Ability to buy a modest home near their work, afford to have children and send them to college, etc.

How exactly do these gadgets ‘compensate’ for loss of education health-care, financial independence, and ability to grow wealth?

I'm just saying it helps people feel happy despite other losses.

Does it? Indicators of happiness seem to be going down not up. Is there anything to suggest that gadgets help people feel happy?

> Bringing down Apple may benefit nobody, but there is no longer any reason for most Americans to care about the success of American businesses since they can’t share in the prosperity.

Any American can invest in American companies. And even if they do not, they benefit from the taxes the companies pay. (And yes, they do pay their taxes -- they pay a whole lot of taxes.)

But do people feel that they pay their fair share?

Most American’s can’t afford to invest in the stock market to any meaningful degree, and certainly not in any way that would offset the proven wage stagnation that has been going on form decades. Therefore your first point is false and all economic analysis concludes that the share of prosperity for most Americans has been declining.

Apple certainly does pay their fair share of taxes, but this doesn’t do anything to change the economic structure.

Your facts are correct, but irrelevant.

Apple does not pay their fair share - http://fortune.com/2018/01/18/apple-bonuses-money-us-350-bil...

Despite the innuendo, that piece doesn’t actually show that.

Apple exists under the same tax regime as every other company and pays what is due. You can certainly argue for increasing taxes on various corporate activities, but to claim that Apple doesn’t pay it’s share is false.

The point is, paying their legally mandated share is not necessarily paying their fair share

By what standard, other than tax law, can the fair amount of tax be determined?

By some assumed standard of morality. "Fair" tax can never be determined by tax law - only "legal" can be determined that way.

There exists a fair tax: the user fee. Pay for what you use. (But then we are still reduced to bargaining over what is a fair price).

Insurance is also a form of fair tax, when premiums are based on claim history and objective risk factors, and the market is reasonably competitive.

Are any companies paying their ‘fair share’ then?

Can you show me a single example of a company paying more than it’s legally mandated share?

If not - why pick on Apple?

To invest in American companies you'd first need capital to invest. It's not like that's a birthright.

You can not invest living paycheck to paycheck. "Any American" can not do what you are assuming is so simple.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com