It's not so much about the level of taxes as it is about taxing foreign income, which is not something that other countries do, giving a competitive disadvantage to the US.
Even if Apple brings back the cash and dividends it out, that's more money in the pockets of shareholders, which are pretty much everybody with an index fund, pension funds, mutual funds, etc. That can't hurt the US compared to leaving the cash abroad.
Ultimately, they use financial analysts for the annual reports, but these analysts don't make numbers out of thin air, they are using the data generated by Google on their current activities and their own forecasters' expectations. Big banks analysts do not have access to as much company knowledge as the employees themselves.
It's hard to truly compare, but I started from VPN review sites and just disqualified most of the sites that seemed to care more about torrenting than about privacy, and of the remaining ones I went with the one with the best reviews and official policies.
If that was all they were doing, that'd be fine. But read the book.
Some exchanges have 150 types of orders that are mostly undocumented and unknown to most regular players, created specifically so that HFT can not do what they publicly appear to be doing, or take incentives without providing liquidity, etc. The public price that everybody seems is outdated compared to the private prices that HFTers see, so they can risklessly front-run people because they already know if a price has dropped or rise, etc. All that stuff isn't just fast market-making.
The "public price that everyone else sees" is the same price as the HFTs see. These are available on the direct feeds from the various exchanges, and there's no discrimination against non-HFTs. Anyone who pays for it can get it. It's an equivalent advantage to having a Bloomberg - more data, faster.
That's strange logic. Whatever happened or not with Billy Beane, he's absolutely right about the HFT-bank-broker strategies that he singles out in his book. Most of the critics of the book seem to not have read it, sadly..
I suppose my comment was silly and snarky. Clearly Michael Lewis is a gifted writer. But he's not a journalist, and he takes sides. He uses his enormous talent to demonize some and lionize others, when often the facts of the case could easily be viewed from another perspective. The problem isn't simply that Lewis's critics don't have the facts on their side; it's that they lack his eloquence and his podium.
To that end, referring to The Blind Side, the fact that Lewis was a schoolmate of Tuohy at an elite prep school in New Orleans, and the NCAA did investigate the Tuohy-Oher relationship, its not beyond the realm of possibility that Tuohy got away with something in adopting Oher.
As to Billy Beane, thanks to Michael Lewis he's touted as a visionary who literally changed the game of baseball, except the teams he put together have never been to the World Series, and over his GM career, the A's are slightly over .500. It's possible that he's not so revolutionary.
This is not to say the Lewis gets his facts wrong. He doesn't by and large. But non-fiction is like photography in that it is not a clinical representation, and the same event from different perspectives can be understood very differently.
I don't know. Would he drop the character that made him successful in the first place? He already has a successful talk show and a lot of leverage. I suspect he negotiated a lot of freedom, though I can't be sure how far he'll go with it.
I don't have a 5s, but I went from the original retina iPad (with the A5) to the iPad Air (with A7) and the difference is massive, and it does lead to more usage. Just the waiting time could easily result in me going on 20% more webpages per day, or watching an extra youtube video.
Indeed. The fact that this is specifically about the 5s and the recent iPad tells me that part of this is probably the speed of the A7. If it's faster to open apps, browse the web, etc, you tend to do more of it. That makes the device more useful to users and reduces friction, which leads to high usage.
In short: They use more data because they're better devices.
But there are also probably some of the other variables mentioned by the parent. They just apply to all iOS devices equally, not just those models.
True. I won't argue that better, faster devices will get more usage. For the day that I owned a 5s, it was incredibly fast. There is one more thing I forgot, however -- there might also be a bias for the 5s in that early adopters (and those who upgrade every year) could be more likely to both own the 5s and have been trained by past iPhones to use as much data as they want. Those who stick with older phones might not use them as often off wi-fi. (Where "as often" is still within reach.) Who knows, though. Perhaps the difference is that the iPhone 5S is easier to unlock, or supports LTE in more places. I'm sick of guessing, at this point. :)