Comments on: Apple, banking and taxpayer subsidy http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2014/02/05/apple-banking-and-taxpayer-subsidy/ Wed, 07 Oct 2015 17:23:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: SamuelReich http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2014/02/05/apple-banking-and-taxpayer-subsidy/comment-page-1/#comment-2058 Mon, 10 Feb 2014 10:54:15 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/?p=628#comment-2058 Good monetary policy requires the opposite of the profit motive for banks. Good monetary policy requires banks to lend more during deflation and less during inflation. The only two ways to do this is for the fed to set the total loans a must make. The bank as any business must show profit and cannot print money like the Fed. Therefore they must be paid for loan processing service by the fed who would then own the loan. Or the fed must go into the banking business.

Privet banking loosely regulated has led to bubbles for hundreds of years.

]]>
By: BidnisMan http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2014/02/05/apple-banking-and-taxpayer-subsidy/comment-page-1/#comment-2057 Sun, 09 Feb 2014 16:36:25 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/?p=628#comment-2057 So – let me understand this. Government is a ‘healthy part of the economy’ because the taxpayer funded (for no return) the iPhone and bailed out the banks? No – these stand as examples of why Government should stay out of business, unless the business they engage in is to help every citizen and not some select group of shareholders.

Remember that all ideas borrow from all other ideas that came before it – so it could be argued Apple owes their success to one Alexander Graham Bell. Remember as well that inventions are part of the time – if someone fails to discover them then later on someone else will discover them.

]]>
By: phoen2011 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2014/02/05/apple-banking-and-taxpayer-subsidy/comment-page-1/#comment-2054 Fri, 07 Feb 2014 12:46:19 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/?p=628#comment-2054 the real scandal is that big ompanies do not pay taxes anymore. So in the future no research founded by the goverment. Only more police to protect the people who do not want to pay taxes

]]>
By: Benny27 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2014/02/05/apple-banking-and-taxpayer-subsidy/comment-page-1/#comment-2053 Thu, 06 Feb 2014 19:25:26 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/?p=628#comment-2053 The pseudo-intellectual post by Mr. Kemmish sets up a strawman to attack. Government development of Arpanet was the thirty year+ incubation period for a project that would never have been funded privately. The point being that the internet is the descendant of that project, not that we use Arpanet now. I am sure you have heard the phrase, “we stand on the shoulders of giants.” I would add, ” and we steal the resulting profits for ourselves, when they are in fact un-earned to a large degree.”

This could have a much better example: pharmaceuticals. Most Drugs research is in the form of basic science, almost exclusively funded and performed by government dollars. In the US, something like 40% of actual drug research (in addition to all the science mentioned just now) is performed by the NIH. The “private sector” then makes some small innovation on the back of all this research and can claim a patent for themselves to profit from all of these contributions by the taxpayer. Anyone who thinks the government is incapable of innovation does not understand how science and research works, as well as the government. To deny this basic reality is to engage in religious enthusiasm.

]]>
By: Ian_Kemmish http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2014/02/05/apple-banking-and-taxpayer-subsidy/comment-page-1/#comment-2052 Thu, 06 Feb 2014 09:21:45 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/?p=628#comment-2052 The pedant would observe that it was actually the customers of such diverse companies as Xerox, Emagic and Lucasfilm which funded the most important parts of Apple’s R & D from the point of view of the iPhone’s USPs.

And that the publicly funded early research on networks of networks benefits equally both Apple and companies with far lower profit margins, and consequently can’t be contributing to the part of Apple’s profits which exercises Messrs Mazzucato and Ostrom.

And that this whole point seems broadly equivalent to pointing out that Concorde was actually a Nazi technology project – good for winning bets in the pub but little else. If we were still using the kind of networks that Arpanet represented, or the kind of LCD displays that RSRE Malvern invented, smartphones would still look like one of Byte Magazine’s April fool features from the 1980’s.

]]>