Linked by David Adams on Fri 4th Dec 2009 17:16 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 398163
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/20/13 6:17 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 23:02 UTC, submitted by M.Onty
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 22:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
>> Maybe having a money-losing model is what the European regulators want.
SPOT ON. Finally someone else sees what I see so far as the EU going after companies.
Or the EU protecting already well established big companies from having to face competition from a underdog. There is a reason why in European countries there are bugger all new starts up - the taxation is so high that if you're established and large enough the cost is minimal, if you're a small company where every euro counts, you're going to be taken to the cleaners by the tax man.
Then again, the US is no better expecting the employer to pay for the healthcare, retirement etc. of the employee - at what point did I take on the role of being nanny state as an employer? Christ, no wonder manufacturing jobs are leaving the US in droves - an ever expanding government to pay for the military industrial complex and bugger all left to pay for whats really important - health, education and other shared responsibilities.