Waiting for Fitzgerald - Page 33

baltassoc · 09-20-2005, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Come to think of it, a Burger King in Mecca would be a fitting tribute to Flight 93.

Ummmm. Bacon Double Cheeseburger. Agggggghh.

Secret_Agent_Man · 09-20-2005, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
Isn't the registration and yearly fees that all entities must pay to their state of incorporation/organization and any other state in which they do business a sufficient fee for having the privilege or incorporating/organizing?

I sometimes hesitate to speak on matters of which I know nothing (believe it or not) -- but I have to ask --

Are you suggesting that the $500 per year (or some similar small amount) that Microsoft pays to the State of Delware as a fee is fair compensation for the benefits they have accrued by incorporating -- and thus no need for any corporate taxation? I though tyhose fees were suppsoed to cover admin. costs.

Hell, I'd think that given its anticompetitive behavior, MS should arguably have to pay double. Those shareholders have assuredly gained plenty of benefits from the separate entity status.

Hank Chinaski · 09-20-2005, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
I sometimes hesitate to speak on matters of which I know nothing (believe it or not) -- but I have to ask --

Are you suggesting that the $500 per year (or some similar small amount) that Microsoft pays to the State of Delware as a fee is fair compensation for the benefits they have accrued by incorporating -- and thus no need for any corporate taxation? I though tyhose fees were suppsoed to cover admin. costs.

Hell, I'd think that given its anticompetitive behavior, MS should arguably have to pay double. Those shareholders have assuredly gained plenty of benefits from the separate entity status.

Delaware has NO sales tax for some reason.

Sidd Finch · 09-20-2005, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1951292005

So in the months after the Tube bombings, what has the UK Muslim community been busy doing?

Burger King recalls 'sacrilegious' desserts

THE fast-food chain, Burger King, is withdrawing its ice-cream cones after the lid of the dessert offended a Muslim.

The man claimed the design resembled the Arabic inscription for Allah, and branded it sacrilegious, threatening a "jihad".

The chain is being forced to spend thousands of pounds redesigning the lid with backing from The Muslim Council of Britain. It apologised and said: "The design simply represents a spinning ice-cream cone."

The offending lid was spotted in a branch in Park Royal last week by business development manager Rashad Akhtar, 27, of High Wycombe.

He was not satisfied by the decision to withdraw the cones and has called on Muslims to boycott Burger King. He said: "This is my jihad. How can you say it is a spinning swirl? If you spin it one way to the right you are offending Muslims."

A Muslim Council spokesman said: "We commend the sensitive and prompt action that Burger King has taken."

I played basketball for about a year in the Nike "Allah flame" shoes. That year, my game was live. No word on whether the ice cream was good.

Just for laughs, I'll take a contrarian position.

Burger King made an intelligent business decision here, and should have considered how its product label might be perceived. You don't dip fries in beef tallow in India, because it pisses people off. You don't use certain number combinations in China because of superstitions (or when you have Chinese investors -- a major restaurant in SF had to petition for an address change just before opening for this reason). You don't film an SNL skit with Guido Sarducci in Vatican City because, while other people realize it's a joke they take offense.

IMHO, it's all stupid, but other people on this board have argued that calling religious people stupid is wrong.

The guy leading this charge is not calling for bombing of Burger King restaurants. He's calling for a boycott by Muslims because of a product they marketted. This is capitalism, plain and simple -- and hardly the dumbest example of a consumer boycott I've seen (how many right-wing figures in the US have called for boycotts based on where companies advertise, or who TV networks let speak?)

When you do business in or with a variety of cultures, you risk fucking up like this. Somehow, I am not moved to care. (Again -- if the religious nut calls for bombing BK, that's an obviously different issue.)

Penske_Account · 09-20-2005, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Just for laughs, I'll take a contrarian position.

Burger King made an intelligent business decision here, and should have considered how its product label might be perceived. You don't dip fries in beef tallow in India, because it pisses people off. You don't use certain number combinations in China because of superstitions (or when you have Chinese investors -- a major restaurant in SF had to petition for an address change just before opening for this reason). You don't film an SNL skit with Guido Sarducci in Vatican City because, while other people realize it's a joke they take offense.

IMHO, it's all stupid, but other people on this board have argued that calling religious people stupid is wrong.

I think calling religious stupid in the context of serious political discussions is wrongly dismissive of a large segment of the electorate and generally off. The IQ of religious people is probably on the same bell curve as that of aetheists. Making fun of religion for comedic purposes is fine, i.e. Guido Sarducci in the Vatican or analyzing a pizza for a papal image is funny.

Quote:

Originally posted by Sidd Finch

The guy leading this charge is not calling for bombing of Burger King restaurants. He's calling for a boycott by Muslims because of a product they marketted. This is capitalism, plain and simple -- and hardly the dumbest example of a consumer boycott I've seen (how many right-wing figures in the US have called for boycotts based on where companies advertise, or who TV networks let speak?)

I agree with this. I have not been to BK in at least 15 years but I think I will lunch there today in a counter boycott effourt.

SlaveNoMore · 09-20-2005, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Sidd Finch
The guy leading this charge is not calling for bombing of Burger King restaurants. He's calling for a boycott by Muslims because of a product they marketted.

He used the word "jihad" - whihc I'm sure means a lot of other things to a lot of other people.

Penske_Account · 09-20-2005, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
He used the word "jihad" - whihc I'm sure means a lot of other things to a lot of other people.

To mean it means that this is one battle in the larger holy world war going on between the West and radical Islam. The crusade as Bush referred to it. Or did he mean another jihad?

Hank Chinaski · 09-20-2005, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
To mean it means that this is one battle in the larger holy world war going on between the West and radical Islam. The crusade as Bush referred to it. Or did he mean another jihad?

Do you know of any BKs with covered parking?

Shape Shifter · 09-20-2005, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Just for laughs, I'll take a contrarian position.

Burger King made an intelligent business decision here, and should have considered how its product label might be perceived. You don't dip fries in beef tallow in India, because it pisses people off. You don't use certain number combinations in China because of superstitions (or when you have Chinese investors -- a major restaurant in SF had to petition for an address change just before opening for this reason). You don't film an SNL skit with Guido Sarducci in Vatican City because, while other people realize it's a joke they take offense.

IMHO, it's all stupid, but other people on this board have argued that calling religious people stupid is wrong.

The guy leading this charge is not calling for bombing of Burger King restaurants. He's calling for a boycott by Muslims because of a product they marketted. This is capitalism, plain and simple -- and hardly the dumbest example of a consumer boycott I've seen (how many right-wing figures in the US have called for boycotts based on where companies advertise, or who TV networks let speak?)

When you do business in or with a variety of cultures, you risk fucking up like this. Somehow, I am not moved to care. (Again -- if the religious nut calls for bombing BK, that's an obviously different issue.)

Agreed. It was bad business strategy to make an ice cream cone that looked like the symbol for Allah. If they'd made it so it looked like the Virgin Mary, they'd have pilgrims from all over the world lining up for a fucking ice cream cone.

SlaveNoMore · 09-20-2005, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Shape Shifter
Agreed. It was bad business strategy to make an ice cream cone that looked like the symbol for Allah. If they'd made it so it looked like the Virgin Mary, they'd have pilgrims from all over the world lining up for a fucking ice cream cone.

The more I look at these - they aren't even close. The one has 5 connected points - the other has 4 and 1.

If anything, to even suggest these are similar is MORE culturally insensitive.

I mean, is all squiggly writing suggestive of Arabic? Is all Arabic writing the same?

Sexual Harassment Panda · 09-20-2005, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Agreed. It was bad business strategy to make an ice cream cone that looked like the symbol for Allah. If they'd made it so it looked like the Virgin Mary, they'd have pilgrims from all over the world lining up for a fucking ice cream cone.

If it looks like the Virgin Mary, can I as a Christian lick it?

taxwonk · 09-20-2005, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I am not necessarily complaining about local taxes. The benefit there is more tangible and there is more of an oportuntity to address local government on issues. I am talking about the Feds.

In that case, I guess the only morally appropriate action for you to take would be to enlist and offer to pay your own way to Iraq. That would reduce the federal tax burden.

taxwonk · 09-20-2005, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Are dividends received taxed at a different rate than regular income?

Yes. I forget what the formula is, but they are effectively taxed at a 20% rate if the recipient is in the top bracket.

Shape Shifter · 09-20-2005, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sexual Harassment Panda
If it looks like the Virgin Mary, can I as a Christian lick it?

Which denomination?

Sexual Harassment Panda · 09-20-2005, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Which denomination?

Dang, I thought this was universal among Christians. The nuns never told me about the schism between the Virgin Mary Mother of Our Savior the Lord Jesus Christ Ice Cream Cone Lickers and the Virgin Mary Mother of Our Savior the Lord Jesus Christ Ice Cream Cone Non-Lickers. Was this one of those medieval things, or was it more recent - say, a Jim Jones or David Koresh thing?

I am worried that there is so much about my faith that I don't know, and that I will be condemned to everlasting hellfire for it.