It would be great next time if you can mention the whole reason around. unfairness.
Here's the tweet: https://twitter.com/jack/status/1053312151136362496
Do you think that's fair?
abalone's comment that "they've changed their tune. ... and they still shouldn't pay taxes" could simply be hyperbolic, depending on how charitable people are in their interpretation (e.g. "shouldn't pay [the full amount of] taxes").
I think the main thrust of abalone's comment stands: the CEO of Square pushed for a tax that many think is absurd (e.g. darawk), and now that Square has grown and the tax is unfavorable for them, Square wants to change the tax that it seems to have lobbied for (and presumably thought was fair back then) -- that makes Square seem opportunistic [and not having the community's best interest in mind when the CEO lobbied for the tax]. At least, I think that is abalone's implication.
Jack wanted companies to pay more tax to the city. He helped lobby it.
But this part where Saleforce pays less tax than Square is absurd. So, he's against it.
I don't really see any problem with this line of thinking.
To give the exact number, Square pays 20m, and Saleforce pays 10m. But Saleforce is 2-10x bigger than Square. No matter how you cut it. It's not fair.
I want people to pay more income tax as well (to fund other initiatives). But would I want to pay tax MORE than anybody else? Probably not. Does that make me a hypocrite? Hell no.
It just feels like people are being obtuse at this point :S
Uh, no. Jack has specifically and consistently lobbied against paying taxes (see: previous link). In 2011 he threatened to threatened to move Twitter to neighboring Brisbane unless he got the now infamous mid market tax break.[1] Exactly what Stripe just did. He greatly exaggerates the impact of a hypothetical $10M extra towards fighting homelessness on a $26B company with $3B in revenues.
The best response to this “fairness” line was from Marc Benioff himself, who said to Jack, ok, tell us how much you or Square or Twitter has given towards addressing homelessness in any other form. Crickets from Jack. He really doesn’t like paying taxes or giving.
[1] https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/square-ceo-jack-dorseys-tax-...
Even Benioff merely said ~$10m was nothing to Square. He implied it didn't matter that it wasn't fair because the amount was so little. Like Wut?
Because Square doesn't help homeless much (I don't really know how much compared to Saleforce and other companies), so we make a law for a smaller company to pay tax more than a bigger company? We can simply disregard fairness? Really?
Also, Jack explicitly said that he has no problem paying taxes to the city; he wants to pay tax fairly when considering peer companies. We just gonna need to agree to disagree on whether jack is willing to pay tax.
