We, as consumers, want as much competition to provide us with goods ans services as possible. It keeps suppliers honest, it drives down prices, it gies us a greater choice.
I mean as a basic, fundamental principle that underpins all market economies - so if Starbucks did fuck off (voluntarily, due to an 'unfair' tax regimen), they'd be losing out enormously. The 'point' of competition being an incentive to stay in the game. If you see what I mean.*
I thought that the idea was, if one company fucks off, another would fill its place: isn't that the point of competition?
There's is no 'point' to competition. It is certainly something you should be encouraging however, which is what everyone seems to be missing in this 'Starbucks can fuck off' tirade.
*Not sure what I mean.
The best way to object to Starbucks not making enough profit which is taxed in the UK is to boycott their products. If enough people do it, then they will be faced with trading issues. If not enough people do it, then it obviously isn't that important to a lot of people. If you don't do it, you're part of the problem and any ourtage is dangerously close to insincere.