Aw, thank you! I appreciate the sentiment.

Nobody claimed tax is calculated on revenue...? Nowhere in the OP does it say "the purpose of this graph is to understand how Apple does their taxes" nor did I say any such thing. Read what I said:

> It shows you how much of the total inflow vs outflow (the whole point of this graph) through the entire company's finances is tax.

Why are people interested in that? I don't know, maybe you should ASK them, instead of deny that the obvious popularity of these graphs is real and gaslight everyone.

Are Latinos considered white in this chart or not considered?

The dollar amount is meaningful, the percentage is not, as tax is not calculated on revenue.

What do you mean? It shows you how much of the total inflow vs outflow (the whole point of this graph) through the entire company's finances is tax.

It's as meaningful as any other branch of any other Sankey diagram. Obviously people consider them quite meaningful in general, since there's been like 50 of them upvoted to the top of this subreddit recently.

Tax percentage on revenue is utterly meaningless.

The US and EU have been reducing emissions over this time.

To get China and India to reduce emissions, you'd have to bring them up to the same levels of prosperity as the US and EU. Being environmentally friendly is a luxury that developing countries can't afford.

Unless the rubric for the point values is incorrect. The data is just wrong for teams like Michigan State. 10 Final Fours and a Title alone is more than the points they have in the table.

Ah, very informative! Thank you!

Homeownership is actually a unit-level stat, not a person-level stat (at least that's how the census collects it). The technical definition is:

• denominator: occupied housing units
• numerator: occupied housing units that are owner-occupied

To attach person-level info like age & race, standard practice is to use info about the household head.

I’m curious what the overall homeownership rate and investment property rate is as population density rises. Also, is homeownership defined by “at least 1 owned house”? Because I feel like we all have a white friend who owns an airbnb/rental property that would have otherwise been a home on the market.

I used to live in Levittown! They also outlawed blacks from buying in there.

So I guess that generation springboarded Americans to buy more houses?

You're forgetting the taxes paid on every cent returned to shareholders (ie: the only profit actually generated to the owners of the business), as well as the taxes paid by its owners, employees, clients as a result of the business operating.

Also it's 19%, not 5%.

I agree though, corporate taxes shouldn't be 5%. They should be 0%.

Good callout -- these are all important factors not considered in this analysis. This report may be interesting to you. It finds that gaps in income, marital status, and credit scores explain some (but not all) of the gap.

> Can someone explain this puzzling aspect as to why having a mountain of cash ($200B in cash and short term investments) is so bad, but having massive liabilities is considered to be a good idea?

There's an opportunity cost in having that cash on the balance sheet, since it's cash that isn't working for a return. If the expected return on keeping that cash is less than the cost of capital, you're effectively burning that cash by keeping it in the company bank account.

This means that unless the company has a good reason to keep it (ie: they want to use it soon for a big investment) they should be returning that cash to its owners, so they can reinvest it elsewhere.

Whether you should be funding your business with debt or equity, depends on your cost of debt and your cost of equity, which in turn depends on your business model.

For a company like Apple, with huge revenue and profit generating capacity without needing substantial capital assets, a good credit rating in a zero interest rate environment, the cost of debt is going to be fairly low and as such funding the business with debt is more attractive than equity.

Great depression followed by a war followed by a huge increase in people's mobility (including lots of veterans using their GI Bill post WW2)

Just my guess, lol

Their return from WWII coincided with a handful of social changes that encouraged homeownership: massive suburban housing construction (see: Levittown), government-sponsored VA mortgages, and a whole lot of couples having children.

[deleted]

If I sell burgers, and it costs me roughly $1.00 per burger to purchase the burger ingredients, pay rent on the kitchen/vending location, pay for employees etc, and I sell the burgers for $1.05 each, The thing that gets taxed is the left over profit, ie $0.05. Same principle applies here. Only difference is the progressive tax on corporation profit is virtually non existent (roughly a flat 20% based on the fiscal year). Now, the problems/tax evasion comes from what is considered as part of a business’s overhead. Often, these are exaggerated due to the incentive of being taxed less.

I wonder what cause The Greatest Generation such a delay in homeownership. Wars?

Widening as age advances has the effect of widening the gap over time: it was 22 percentage points in 1980 and has widened to 29 today.

I don't know. As far as the NYT is concerned, it's been sus ever since they got rid of the public editor.

Unfortunately the subgroups get too small/noisy if we try to split this by city.
But you're right -- large, expensive cities have lower homeownership rates, particularly for Black households. The states with the highest Black homeownership rate are in the Southeastern US: South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia.

For the purpose of digging into this data (not necessarily for the visualization itself), it would be nice to see black and white averages compared across income cohorts, or otherwise somehow controlled for income. That is, are the black mean incomes just lower but home ownership on par with white income peers, or is there a racial effect across income levels?

Can we do one for major cities? No way is minority home ownership that high in for example LA or New York