Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, August 25, 2014

Burger King is in talks to buy Tim Hortons in hopes of creating a new, publicly traded company with its headquarters in Canada. With a new base in Canada, Burger King, now based in Miami, could shave its U.S. tax bill. Tax inversions have become increasingly popular among U.S. companies trying to cut costs. In an inversion, a U.S. company reorganizes in a country with a lower tax rate by acquiring or merging with a company there. Inversions allow companies to transfer money earned overseas to the parent company without paying additional U.S. taxes. Walgreen, the huge drugstore chain, backed away from such a plan under intense public pressure.

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

rcade

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

BOYCOTT Burger King.

#1 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2014-08-25 01:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

Easiest way to fix this would be to have a standard corporate tax rate on US earnings that applies regardless of where the company is headquartered - with the exception being a small discount for US based companies. Don't tax overseas earnings at all. If anyone doesn't like it, they can sell their crap somewhere else.

#2 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-25 01:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

One more reason to remodel our tax code: drop corporate taxes entirely, make a more progressive personal income tax. Remove onus from business, make them more able to compete internationally, and don't let anyone conduct business in the US who is not a citizen.

The taxes should land on CEO's and board members, not out of the lower class's pocket.

#3 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-08-25 01:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'm sick and tired of hearing about corporation's "fiduciary responsibility" to their shareholders. US based corporations need to stop comparing the rates with countries like Ireland unless they expect the Irish Army to protect their interests in the same manner the US military does on a global basis. Many of these nations our corporations are inverting to do not subsidize a legal and regulatory system like we have here in America nor do they have the global protections a US Patent Office provides.

Let's face it: Many of our corporate citizens are freeloading crybabies who expect the citizens to unquestionably support their fiduciary interests beyond their responsibilities to support and maintain a domestic economy that provides stable jobs and employment opportunities for qualified Americans seeking them.

Reality check: These corporations depend upon the commerce the US markets provide far more than we consumers need their selfish, self-serving attitudes when it comes to paying for the maintenance of our free market economy and the infrastructure needs of this still growing nation. This nation has never been cheap when it comes to protecting the interests of corporations, yet they continue to bellyache over the ignorance of most people in understanding just who and what enables them to profit in the first place. If they want to leave, then leave. Just create a special "expatriate" tax on everything they profit from domestically, thereby giving true American companies a small leg up in the US consumer market. And take away any tax breaks for expats, reserve them for US-based companies only.

#4 | Posted by tonyroma at 2014-08-25 01:35 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

I'll bet that they will still get to keep any and all Fed. subsidies and tax breaks. More corporate welfare.

I'm boycotting as well.

#5 | Posted by bat4255 at 2014-08-25 01:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

Jerks.

#6 | Posted by moder8 at 2014-08-25 01:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

I wouldn't eat there if they paid taxes.

#7 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-08-25 01:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

#3,

Tony. Our military shouldn't be doing that either. Screw them. We should drop all such protections and let the rest of the world scramble to shoulder the burden.

#8 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-08-25 01:50 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Tony. Our military shouldn't be doing that either. Screw them. We should drop all such protections and let the rest of the world scramble to shoulder the burden.

We can't, it would destabilize the global economy. Maybe you haven't noticed, but our military doesn't exist in its current form to protect America from the physical threat of foreign armies. It exists to protect the global interests of US corporations and the entire financial industry that underpins all industries and commerce.

It is what it is. Wars are fought over wealth and power, not principles.

#9 | Posted by tonyroma at 2014-08-25 01:54 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

ton, don't you realize that all costs to a company are added on to the price of what they produce?

ton, don't you know that special tax breaks go to the companies that finance political parties? Dem and Rep both.

ton, don't you realize many companies are leaving the US because of high taxes and very restrictive OSHA and EPA? Oh crap, don't forget the that group appointed by little o that won't let Boing open a mfg facility in the south.

#10 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-08-25 01:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

"One more reason to remodel our tax code: drop corporate taxes entirely, make a more progressive personal income tax"

That sounds good. Add a wealth tax and increase inheritance taxes as well, in return for eliminating corporate taxes.

#11 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-25 01:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

#8 | POSTED BY TONYROMA AT 2014-08-25 01:54 PM | FLAG:

Yeah. I've noticed. It's pretty much what I've been posting and protesting against here and other places and forums for over a decade now.

#12 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-08-25 01:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

Almost every other industrialized nation has a territorial tax rather than a worldwide tax system. Those countries generally have lower marginal income tax rates for corporations. How can they afford this? They have instituted a VAT. We could do it here in the U.S. as well and put ourselves on a more competitive playing field, but our political leaders think of compromise as something that should be avoided rather than embraced.

#13 | Posted by taxman at 2014-08-25 02:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

ton, don't you realize that all costs to a company are added on to the price of what they produce?

When has it ever been different Mr, Obvious? The taxpayers of this nation should care more about their personal "fiduciary responsibilities" than they should about corporations who's profits continue to hit all-time highs. Being able to build a business in America has never been a right without attendant responsibilities. Paying one's taxes is one of those.

The next time I see a poorer person renounce their US citizenship over high taxation will be the first. Sorry the same can't be said about some that have great wealth. I wonder why?

#14 | Posted by tonyroma at 2014-08-25 02:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

"and the infrastructure needs of this still growing nation."

The first thing to be done is to stop the nation from growing, in population, infrastructure, etc. It's an over-populated, over-developed resource guzzler in a finite world.

#15 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-25 02:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

I wouldn't eat there if they paid taxes.

#6 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-08-25 01:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

BK is bad even compared to other crappy fast food. When I was a kid my cub scouts group toured a local BK and I remember being violently ill when I got home.

#16 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-25 02:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

BK is bad even compared to other crappy fast food. When I was a kid my cub scouts group toured a local BK and I remember being violently ill when I got home.

#15 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-25 02:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

These fast food places are doing far more damage to this country than skirting on some taxes. They've guaranteed over weight diabetics for generations. If you can eat lunch cheaper than the cost of a bowl of dogfood you shouldn't eat it. The worst part is they run commercials telling people that their food is cheap crap.

#17 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-08-25 02:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

The first thing to be done is to stop the nation from growing, in population, infrastructure, etc. It's an over-populated, over-developed resource guzzler in a finite world.

#14 | Posted by nullifidian

Uh huh, Nulli, you need to stop reading the Population Bomb.

The Population Bomb is a best-selling book written by Stanford University Professor Paul R. Ehrlich and his wife, Anne Ehrlich in 1968. It warned of the mass starvation of humans in the 1970s and 1980s due to overpopulation, as well as other major societal upheavals, and advocated immediate action to limit population growth. Fears of a "population explosion" were widespread in the 1950s and 60s, but the book and its author brought the idea to an even wider audience. The book has been criticized since its publishing for its alarmist tone, and in recent decades for its inaccurate predictions.

=)

#18 | Posted by Daniel at 2014-08-25 02:38 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

The only thing that made the population bomb inaccurate was the very same advances in factory farming that are depleting our soil of nutrients, giving us a monoculture crop practically designed to repeat the potato famine of Ireland on a worldwide scale between either wheat, corn or soy, and deforesting what's left of the natural earth.

Advances such as nitrogen fixing and dwarf wheat have merely delayed the inevitable, not prevented.

#19 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-08-25 02:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

"you need to stop reading the Population Bomb. "

The essential point of that book is more true than ever: the human species will expand beyond the planet's carrying capacity and the population bubble will burst, and there will be a major reduction in global population. Converting finite petroleum into food just postponed the inevitable.

#20 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-25 03:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

Go Canada! Actually, I really don't care. BK was in British hands for many years so this is really no big deal, except to certain Drudgies from The United States of Overreaction.

#21 | Posted by CrisisStills at 2014-08-25 03:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

#18 | Posted by zeropointnrg

No worries, the government will take care of us. Besides, Ireland survived. Albeit, a bit thinner.

#22 | Posted by Daniel at 2014-08-25 03:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

Let them go!

Crap food that I never eat, so WTF do I care? Plenty of McDonalds for the former BK worker to find work at, so what's the big deal?

Oh, taxes are too high? BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Just bring on the Robot Economy already. Then we will have something legitimate to complain about.

#23 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-08-25 03:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

"In an inversion, a U.S. company reorganizes in a country with a lower tax rate by acquiring or merging with a company there. Inversions allow companies to transfer money earned overseas to the parent company without paying additional U.S. taxes."

this is a mechanism to avoid US taxes but only from earnings not realized in the US anyway. It doesn't appear they can shift earnings from the US to Canada as a result of this acquisition.

also.....how much does Tim Hortons of Ontario, Canada currently pay to the IRS in the USA?

none?

and they still won't.

#24 | Posted by eberly at 2014-08-25 03:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Corporations want to be "persons" and the Supreme Court agrees even to the extent of allowing them to have a religion.

So we should give corporate persons the same treatment as biological persons. Once they renounce their citizenship if they want to work here they should go to the back of the line and wait for a "Green Card" to be issued. Of course, Green Card holders have to pay taxes as individuals at the same rate as us biological persons.

What they really want is the status of illegal aliens but not be subject to deportation.

#25 | Posted by TenMile at 2014-08-25 03:50 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

if they want to work here they should go to the back of the line and wait for a "Green Card" to be issued.

#24 | Posted by TenMile

That one ain't working real well ten.

#26 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-08-25 03:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

Soo...you boycott Burger King.

They close stores and put people out of work.

More people are unemployed - less taxes and more out in Welfare and social support. Does not stop Burger King from going to Canada and in fact makes it more reason to go. The reduction in taxes pay for any loss of business

These are the "entry level" postions where people get thier first experience at work.

You do not create more jobs by attacking business. You need employers to have employees.

You want to Punish business - instead of incenting business. Which is why we have the horrible economy we are in currently. 13% or more real unemployment, the only decrease is due to people leaving the economy. Food prices through the roof.

Getting rid of all taxes on business would create a massive boom in the economy. Jobs would come flooding back to the US creating a situation where we would have an explosion in wages as people would have thier choice of jobs.

"But thats not FAIR" you whine. "Then PEOPLE would be paying all the taxes not business". RIGHT. And all those people would have jobs instead of depending upon the government. So all the social programs could be cut or stopped completely. That would create a surplus and taxes on individuals would go down as well.

#27 | Posted by foshaffer at 2014-08-25 06:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

Die, Burger King, die. And all other chain stores.

#28 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-25 06:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

Getting rid of all taxes on business would create a massive boom in the economy. Jobs would come flooding back to the US creating a situation where we would have an explosion in wages as people would have thier choice of jobs.

Posted by foshaffer at 2014-08-25 06:01 PM | Reply

So corporations shouldn't have to pay for the benefits that helped them become so wealthy?? So they get off scott free then???

#29 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2014-08-25 06:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

Soo...you boycott Burger King.
They close stores and put people out of work.
#26 | Posted by foshaffer

Presuming you boycott Burger King to eat at some other crappy fast food joint, it becomes a zero-sum game, does it not?

#30 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-25 06:12 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Timmy ho's steeped tea is the bees knees. So are the dunno in Tim bits. The Mac and cheese is good stuff too.
All other chains can ------- though.

#31 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-08-25 06:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

Cinnamon, not dunno in.

#32 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-08-25 06:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

Well, I can't speak for other places, but here in Calif. almost all of the employees are Latins and a handful of other nationalities. Can't say I care much if the BKs closed here, as I would be surprised if most of the employees are legal immigrants.

#33 | Posted by jrod54 at 2014-08-25 06:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

Have it your way.

#34 | Posted by mysterytoy at 2014-08-25 06:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Can't say I care much if the BKs closed here..."

They not going to move or close, just restructure the headquarters group to dodge US taxes.

#35 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-08-25 07:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yep, U.S. companies going to Europe and Canada due to U.S. taxes.....

Think about that next time you say we have such a low corp tax rate (the printed rate, or the actually collected rate).

If U.S. corp taxes really were so competitive with other western nations, this would not be happening.

COMPANIES WON'T GO TO THIS TROUBLE UNLESS THEY HAVE A REASON TO DO SO.

Suggestion for Liberals:
How about we get out corp tax rates competitive with Canada and western Europe?

#36 | Posted by USAF242 at 2014-08-25 07:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

I even suggested it from a liberal point of view - cut business taxes. Shouldn't even be any. Make it up by increasing taxes on individuals, especially CEO's and board member types, and certainly include non-cash benefits.

The other thing that would help business would be to scrap Obamacare and move to single payer, taking that often unrealized expenses of healthcare off the back of businesses.

#37 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-08-25 07:39 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

This is an outrage! I will never patronize a company that dodges US taxes!

--Sent from my iPhone

#38 | Posted by WhiteDevil at 2014-08-25 07:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

You're forgiven Whitedevil. But only because buying Apple is understandable when children's fingers do such good delicate work on electronics.

#39 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-08-25 07:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

No Snoopy it isn't. If there are two they both need; managers, people working the drive through, counter people and cooks.

Close one and you know need one manager; you may need to add an extra front person and maybe one extra cook to assemble the fast food. But cooking is incremental and most of the additional orders are incremental so a net loss of about 50% or more and a loss of the higher paying manager and asst. Manager positions.

More employers = more employees.

#40 | Posted by foshaffer at 2014-08-25 07:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

How the phone takes the word DON'T and converts it to know - well I just don't know.

I was going to write "I just know don't" but wasn't sure anyone would get it.

#41 | Posted by foshaffer at 2014-08-25 08:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

so a net loss of about 50% or more and a loss of the higher paying manager and asst. Manager positions.

Earlier, it was These are the "entry level" postions where people get thier first experience at work.

Are the goalposts heavy when you carry them from Miami to Canada for Burger King?

#42 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-25 08:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Getting rid of all taxes on business would create a massive boom in the economy. Jobs would come flooding back to the US creating a situation where we would have an explosion in wages as people would have thier choice of jobs."

Would employers hire people they don't need or would they just salt it away in offshore tax havens? Employment increases when the demand for products and services exceeds capacity. Give the rest of us a tax break and we will spend more. If they don't offshore production there will be more people with jobs spending money and driving up demand. Henry Ford knew that so he paid his employees more than the prevailing wage so they could afford to buy cars. An employer without customers is a broke employer. Customers are the real job creators.

#43 | Posted by TenMile at 2014-08-25 08:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

Henry Ford paid a high wage but you worked hard,most guys could keep the pace for awhile and then had to give up.

#44 | Posted by bruceaz at 2014-08-25 09:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

Do you guys know nothing about business? 1) the front counter people are entry level. 2)when you operate a business it is normally 8 to 1 employees to management 3) WHEN YOU CLOSE OR MERGE a business it is management that gets eliminated as the competitors or the merged business can take on the extra business just by working current employees harder. Limited impact on managers.

4) Removing taxes on business means they no longer need to recover it in the price. So they can lower the price creating more sales. If it is manufacturing you have additional lower cost as you gain economies of scale. This creates a dynamic that allows you to add overhead to maintain the increased production. 5) The often quoted Henry Ford analogy is pure bull. Here is the truth.

"Ford's turnover rate was very high. In 1913, Ford hired more than 52,000 men to keep a workforce of only 14,000. New workers required a costly break-in period, making matters worse for the company. Also, some men simply walked away from the line to quit and look for a job elsewhere. Then the line stopped and production of cars halted. The $5-a-day rate (twice the normal rate)as about half pay and half bonus it wasn't $5 a day and it was done actually to reduce total labour costs by reducing labour turnover.

As to allowing them to buy cars -again a lie.

#45 | Posted by foshaffer at 2014-08-25 09:51 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Model T cost between $550 and $450 (depends on which year we're talking about). 14,000 cars sold at that price gives us $7 3/4 million to $6 1/4 million in income to the company.

It should be obvious that paying the workforce an extra $9 million so that they can then buy $7 million's worth of company production just isn't a way to increase your profits.

Car production in the year before the pay rise was 170,000, in the year of it 202,000. As we can see above the total labour establishment was only 14,000 anyway. Even if all of his workers bought a car every year it wasn't going to make any but a marginal difference to the sales of the firm

So the often quoted Ford myth is just that -a myth.

#46 | Posted by foshaffer at 2014-08-25 09:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

#43,#44 plus they'd come to your house to see if you and your family were righteous enough.

#47 | Posted by bruceaz at 2014-08-25 10:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

Remember the days when you could get two Whoppers for two bucks? They made a lot money out of me. Those were the days. I think pre 9-11 you were good to go with 37 grams of fat per burger..... I gained five pounds in a month.

#48 | Posted by coyote at 2014-08-25 10:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Do you guys know nothing about business?"

Sure, these days it is all about screwing the employees and the customers. If you have flown on an airline recently you know that they would like nothing better than dispensing with both those pesky employees and customers.

In the '70s and 80's my neighbors who worked for Chrysler got really good employee discounts. Of course they didn't make a great deal if anything directly but they convinced a lot of us to buy their products because they liked the company and were proud of their products. What does it say about a product if the people who make it can't or won't buy it?

A man that won't treat his employees right sure as Hell won't treat his customers right.

Recently a WalMart employee told me under her breath that she would not buy anything there and a McDonalds employee told me that she could not afford to eat there. They were far from entry level. A couple of years ago a WalMart automotive department manager ------- to me that he couldn't find people to install tires for $8.00 per hour. Do you want to trust people who will do that work for $8.00 an hour with your safety? Don't worry, they have lots of good lawyers.

#49 | Posted by TenMile at 2014-08-25 10:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

Tenmile-like I said you know nothing about running a business. Your total analysis is snide comments from disgruntled employees. That is not analysis.

#50 | Posted by foshaffer at 2014-08-25 11:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's a pretty good analysis when that's about all you get everywhere. Businesses love our current unemployment rate. Lets them abuse employees all they want, while still pointing to the underclass and reminding them it could be worse.

#51 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-08-25 11:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

I blame all the people stupid enough to be outraged about this. Get over it folks. You're living in America, and this is business as usuall.

#52 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2014-08-25 11:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

I just hope they don't screw up Timmy's... it's supposed to be a pretty good place to work.

#53 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-08-26 12:00 AM | Reply | Flag:

Recently a WalMart employee told me under her breath that she would not buy anything there and a McDonalds employee told me that she could not afford to eat there. They were far from entry level.

10Mile

Nope. I don't believe you. If the WMT employee shops elsewhere, then it's because he has a lot more disposable income than just about every single WMT employee on earth. And if the McDonald's employee can't afford to eat there, even after the discounts for on-shift meals, then it can only mean she is starving to death to feed a coke habit.

#54 | Posted by WhiteDevil at 2014-08-26 12:59 AM | Reply | Flag:

Would employers hire people they don't need or would they just salt it away in offshore tax havens?
#41 | Posted by TenMile

You forgot "buy back their own stock" which is what they've been doing quite a lot of since 2009.

#55 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-26 01:09 AM | Reply | Flag:

Liberals are fond of saying that corporations shouldn't be treated like people. But they expect corporations for some reason to be flag-waving patriots when it comes to paying taxes.

#56 | Posted by WhiteDevil at 2014-08-26 01:12 AM | Reply | Flag:

And if the McDonald's employee can't afford to eat there, even after the discounts for on-shift meals, then it can only mean she is starving to death to feed a coke habit.

#51 | Posted by WhiteDevil

McDonald's is only cheap if you don't know how to boil water or open a can.

#57 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-26 01:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

Both suck. Booger Kind makes me [...] faster than Taco Bell or even Jack in the Box.

And I guess I got out of western NY before Tim Hortons sunk their claws in. My family and friends rave about it but I think Dunkin Donuts kicks their ass hands down.

#58 | Posted by jpw at 2014-08-26 04:20 AM | Reply | Flag:

The liberal answer: Boycott... yeah.. that will work.

Change the stupid tax code so that companies are not looking over the fence at greener grass.

#59 | Posted by sames1 at 2014-08-26 08:45 AM | Reply | Flag:

Jeeeesuz, wait till these poster find out where the cruise lines are based.

#60 | Posted by CrisisStills at 2014-08-26 09:15 AM | Reply | Flag:

Guess who is financing this deal? Warren Buffet. I thought he was the presidents champion for proper tax evaluation and enforcement?

I guess this can't be such a bad thing to do if Warren Buffet seems to support it, seeing as he was lifted up as an exemplar for his statements about raising taxes a year or two ago.

www.cnbc.com

#61 | Posted by HeuristicGratis at 2014-08-26 10:12 AM | Reply | Flag:

Hey lefties, how about we make our corporate tax structure competitive with CANADA and WESTERN EUROPE!!!

#62 | Posted by USAF242 at 2014-08-26 10:49 AM | Reply | Flag:

Is anybody surprised that Buffet would finance a major tax dodge he can profit from after donating a billion dollars to Priorities USA, the biggest Democrat super PAC there is whom is about to bankroll the Clintons?

#63 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2014-08-26 10:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

#63 You sir cannot read. From your linked article:

*Note: I made this up. The only part that's true is the amount spent so far by the conservative PACs (compared to only $7 million by Priorities USA!) and the fact that Buffett won't contribute to Super PACs on principle. I think it's mistake: a unilateral disarming that won't change anyone's opinion about the wisdom of billionaires buying elections. Do you agree? Can we send a message to Warren Buffett? Other rich Democrats? If you want the CU case reconsidered, you've got beat them at their own game. And a note to Warren or Warren's people: dude, you turn 82 in a few weeks. You can't take it with you. Make a difference with it while you have the chance!

#64 | Posted by HeuristicGratis at 2014-08-26 10:58 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Guess who is financing this deal? Warren Buffet."

No he isn't, his investment firm is. Burger King is owned by a Brazillian company anyway.

#65 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-08-26 10:59 AM | Reply | Flag:

#63 You sir cannot read.
#64 | POSTED BY HEURISTICGRATIS AT 2014-08-26 10:58 AM | FLAG:

You're not supposed to read it, you're screwing up my troll. Drudge Report has Buffet's picture front & center right now.

#66 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2014-08-26 11:19 AM | Reply | Flag:

""Guess who is financing this deal? Warren Buffet."

No he isn't, his investment firm is. Burger King is owned by a Brazillian company anyway."

LOL... but when Romney's company Bain did anything it was attributed to Romney, even when he was long gone from the company.

#67 | Posted by sames1 at 2014-08-26 01:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yeah for Burger King. This is what happens when democrats get in office and create an enviroment of tax and spend. Socialism doesn't work and our 17.5 trillion dollar deficit proves it. Thanks, Oblama.

#68 | Posted by mcmlcxx at 2014-08-26 02:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

blah, blah, blikity, blah, blah, blah Obama,
blah, blah taxes and stuff, all Obama's fault,
gee look how smart I am, my name is
MCMLCXXtra crispy between the ears...

another blame everything on Obama peep...
no brains, don't understand the issues
because don't care to....mind
already made up...blah...

Its called Corporate Tax Evasion Genius,
and that is a Rightwing Idea...

#69 | Posted by earthmuse at 2014-08-26 03:20 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

EARTH...So if that is the case why did they not move and by Horton's earlier? Why did they keep thier headquarters in the US all these years if it is just Corporate Tax Evasion?

"no brains, don't understand the issues because don't care to...." So what "issues" are so overwhelming that he or the rest of us don't care to understand?? They are moving because the US tax rate is higher than Canada. They get enough savings in taxes to pay for the move. And financed by Buffett. The result is Jobs leaving the US and going to Canada. There is no "right wing" idea of tax evasion.

The "Right Wing" idea is to lower US business tax rates so they cannot afford to leave and we keep the jobs.

What is the "left wing" idea that will do the same????

#70 | Posted by foshaffer at 2014-08-26 04:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Its called Corporate Tax Evasion Genius, and that is a Rightwing Idea..."

Followed by Google, Apple, and many left wing businesses. It's actually tax avoidance, Genius.

#71 | Posted by sames1 at 2014-08-26 06:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

just heard this....that burger king isn't even an American company but owned by some sort of firm in BRAZIL.,..,.

has that been discussed yet ?

#72 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-08-26 06:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

"but when Romney's company Bain did anything it was attributed to Romney"

So?

#73 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-08-26 07:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

"has that been discussed yet ?"

What's to discuss? It's a simple fact.

#74 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-08-26 07:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

warren buffett stands to do very well under this new move.....what do you say to that Libs?

#75 | Posted by Maverick at 2014-08-26 07:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

"warren buffett stands to do very well under this new move"

So?

#76 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-08-26 07:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

BOYCOTT Burger King.

#1 | POSTED BY LARRYMOHR AT 2014-08-25 01:17 PM | REPLY | FLAG

Yeah that will show them. That way the employees at the store can lose their jobs, go into the unemployment lines and not pay state, local, federal taxes.

A mind is a terrible thing to waste. But apparently you have.

#77 | Posted by RobThomas at 2014-08-27 08:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

I have boycotted Burger King for most of my life, not because of any political consideration though. I just don't like their french fries.

#79 | Posted by danni at 2014-08-27 09:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

I miss the good old days when BK and Mickey D's were always next door to one another. I would order MD fries and burger (for the bun) and go to BK for the patty. BK always has stale bread.

#80 | Posted by kanrei at 2014-08-27 09:23 AM | Reply | Flag:

has that been discussed yet ?"

What's to discuss? It's a simple fact.

#74 | Posted by REDIAL at 20

well okaaaay...I had to take off or I would have asked.... does this, if anything, make a difference...

with the ascension of this oppressive and dictatorial government headed by a known liar, I may be changing my opinion on things like this..I MIGHT now say....take off while you can...before you become another GM....

also, the potus using the word "DESERTERS" as if they left their comrades in arms....same approach that the word 'deniers' is used on that 'other issue'.....makes it sound like we also deny the murder of millions of jews....language used by these people to ensure further support from low information voters...

#81 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-08-27 12:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

have boycotted Burger King for most of my life, not because of any political consideration though. I just don't like their french fries.

#79 | Posted by danni at 2014-

AHHH aha ha ha ha....thanks for the laugh....no seriously....all of this talk about this and that and you put it right down to the basics....

it's been long held that MAC has the best fries for the CAR....their experiment in the healthy fries was a massive failure...but the taste of the burger is one of the better ones in fast food..

EVERY fast food should be boycotted because it's so bad for you....well except for me, of course..... LOL

#82 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-08-27 12:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

so the outrage against this here must not be all that high....we've morphed into discussion of fries and comparison....does that mean it's no big deal

OR is the left backing off because BUFFET is now in on it....

#83 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-08-27 12:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

This is an outrage! I will never patronize a company that dodges US taxes!

--Sent from my iPhone

#38 | Posted by WhiteDevil at 2

AHHHHHHHHH ha ha

SORRY danni...but your great comment just got passed up...this is FUNNY...

but was it schumer yesterday who said something about all their stores being moved to Canada......??

#84 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-08-27 12:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort