If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   New study shows that the rich are hiding between $21-32 trillion in offshore tax havens around the world. A sum greater than the entire US economy and enough to bail out all of the EU and put Africa on its feet   (guardian.co.uk) divider line 308
    More: Asinine, tax havens  
•       •       •

3864 clicks; posted to Politics » on 22 Jul 2012 at 2:47 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



308 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-22 12:00:26 AM
This is my surprised face.
2.bp.blogspot.com

Like I always said, it's a load of bull that we don't have the resources to go around. We just don't like to share because human beings are childish little shiats.
 
2012-07-22 12:02:10 AM
And??? People are money grubbing scumbags. Next...
 
2012-07-22 12:04:05 AM
Well, I'm sure they worked harder than the rest of us so they deserve that money, right?
 
2012-07-22 12:04:51 AM
...and people would like to discuss the jobs created by this?

Go ahead. Explain why we need MOAR tax breaks for these folks, please. You have the floor...
 
2012-07-22 12:06:02 AM
It'll trickle down. Like any day now.
 
2012-07-22 12:07:49 AM
I dont know anything about personal wealth being hidden, but I do know that many companies are doing it. Apple, for example, has billions of dollars in cash just sitting there. Apple refuses to bring the money back home until the tax is lower. Their argument is that they were already taxed once by the country where they sold their goods, so they shouldnt have to pay more.

I am thinking that maybe a sliding scale might be the best way to approach this. Make it something like if you return the money to the states within one month of being handed it, you get taxed at a lower rate. The longer it stays over seas, the higher the tax rate goes.
 
2012-07-22 12:08:20 AM
Whoa whoa whoa, I thought the Chinese were putting the African continent back on its feet.
 
2012-07-22 12:09:49 AM
It's too bad that greed doesn't cause ass cancer.
 
2012-07-22 12:12:49 AM

hubiestubert: ...and people would like to discuss the jobs created by this?

Go ahead. Explain why we need MOAR tax breaks for these folks, please. You have the floor...


These are the super rich. My brother is a small business owner, and like most small business owners he pays all of his taxes, and one of his largest expenses outside of payroll and healthcare is matching payroll taxes for his employees. You have to get into the super rich territory to get the exemptions. I'm all for lowering the tax burden for people who actually pay taxes. I could give less of a shiat about people who don't pay any taxes at all.

The super rich people don't need tax breaks. The problem is that they just ship their money elsewhere to avoid paying taxes on it. If there's a way to keep them from doing that - hey I'm with you all the way. They aren't "job creators" they are "wealth hiders."
 
2012-07-22 12:14:24 AM

shanrick: It's too bad that greed doesn't cause ass cancer.


If they have a taste for scotch or bourbon it does.
 
2012-07-22 12:15:32 AM

cman: I dont know anything about personal wealth being hidden, but I do know that many companies are doing it. Apple, for example, has billions of dollars in cash just sitting there. Apple refuses to bring the money back home until the tax is lower. Their argument is that they were already taxed once by the country where they sold their goods, so they shouldnt have to pay more.

I am thinking that maybe a sliding scale might be the best way to approach this. Make it something like if you return the money to the states within one month of being handed it, you get taxed at a lower rate. The longer it stays over seas, the higher the tax rate goes.


That's...actually not a bad idea, except they can continue to use the money overseas. They would probably consider a rate of zero the line that would get them to bring the money back, and that's bullshiat.
 
2012-07-22 12:15:43 AM
Bring back proscription and the officium dictatoris. Six months is all we need.

This is unbelievable.
 
2012-07-22 12:17:16 AM

Lsherm: cman: I dont know anything about personal wealth being hidden, but I do know that many companies are doing it. Apple, for example, has billions of dollars in cash just sitting there. Apple refuses to bring the money back home until the tax is lower. Their argument is that they were already taxed once by the country where they sold their goods, so they shouldnt have to pay more.

I am thinking that maybe a sliding scale might be the best way to approach this. Make it something like if you return the money to the states within one month of being handed it, you get taxed at a lower rate. The longer it stays over seas, the higher the tax rate goes.

That's...actually not a bad idea, except they can continue to use the money overseas. They would probably consider a rate of zero the line that would get them to bring the money back, and that's bullshiat.


Apple wants to bring the money back. Its just sitting there collecting dust. If they are investing in overseas projects, that is different, because the money is being spent to fuel the global economy. Apple sitting on this shiat hurts
 
2012-07-22 12:19:33 AM
Money is a finite resource. These cretins have drained the economy into their own private holding tanks.

We're under drought conditions, while they're swimming in it.
 
2012-07-22 12:19:52 AM
Don't you dare suggest that tax cuts sunset, as was the stated intent of the guy who signed the farking thing in the first place.

They'll call you a hippie socialist who's jealous of others' success. Be a good boy and trust that the next tax cut extension will work. This time. We promise.

That's the "new" plan for prosperity you're trying to sell America, you FOX-breathing shills. When we're all dried husks, you'll still be rich. Except we'll no longer be supporting you via demand and reasonably ordered society.

Keep farking that chicken.
 
2012-07-22 12:22:29 AM
They're hoarders. Hoarding humanity's resources.
 
2012-07-22 12:25:48 AM

omnibus_necanda_sunt: Bring back proscription and the officium dictatoris. Six months is all we need.

This is unbelievable.


Well I for one can't think of any time where this idea backfired.
 
2012-07-22 12:30:07 AM
No Econ 101 >C students here.
 
2012-07-22 12:59:45 AM

bojon: No Econ 101 >C students here.


I can only assume you are talking about yourself. It looks like you may not have done too well in English either.
 
2012-07-22 01:09:20 AM
I'm sure someone will be along any minute now to tell how this is actually a good thing. And tax cuts.


/jump, you f*ckers
 
2012-07-22 01:16:18 AM
So the Invisible Hand is squarely in the Invisible Pocket.
 
2012-07-22 01:53:23 AM
And remember - suggesting we change the rules to prevent this sort of thing automatically makes you a socialist.
 
2012-07-22 02:50:36 AM

Weaver95: And remember - suggesting we change the rules to prevent this sort of thing automatically makes you a socialist.




1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-07-22 02:53:09 AM
while of course they should be paying taxes on it like the rest of the 49-99 percentiles, isn't the implication of the headline, that it could ALL be "redistributed" a little bit unnerving?
 
2012-07-22 02:54:02 AM

Weaver95: And remember - suggesting we change the rules to prevent this sort of thing automatically makes you a socialist.


No, but when governments spend money irresponsibly and then want to raise taxes to pay for the debt, I can't blame people for moving money offshore.
 
2012-07-22 02:55:35 AM
Pretty soon it's going to be nothing but the super-rich and the poverty stricken with nothing in between. Wonder what will happen then?
 
2012-07-22 02:55:48 AM

proteus_b: while of course they should be paying taxes on it like the rest of the 49-99 percentiles, isn't the implication of the headline, that it could ALL be "redistributed" a little bit unnerving?


Class Warfare™
 
2012-07-22 02:59:03 AM

slayer199: Weaver95: And remember - suggesting we change the rules to prevent this sort of thing automatically makes you a socialist.

No, but when governments spend money irresponsibly and then want to raise taxes to pay for the debt, I can't blame people for moving money offshore.


Fine, but if the rich's reasoning for hoarding money like this was a fear that it could be used irresponsibly, than they could put the money into charities they trust to try and help the world (NOT religious tithes/SuperPACs). Then again, having their money do nothing does seem like a valid purpose for it, and has totally valid logic supporting it.
 
2012-07-22 03:00:54 AM
And republicans cheered.
 
2012-07-22 03:01:23 AM

fusillade762: Pretty soon it's going to be nothing but the super-rich and the poverty stricken with nothing in between. Wonder what will happen then?


The black plague?
 
2012-07-22 03:04:33 AM

404 page not found: proteus_b: while of course they should be paying taxes on it like the rest of the 49-99 percentiles, isn't the implication of the headline, that it could ALL be "redistributed" a little bit unnerving?

Class Warfare™


Right. According to this article, that's over already. We lost.
 
2012-07-22 03:05:41 AM
That much money, we could teach Africa how to dance.
 
2012-07-22 03:14:13 AM

Coelacanth: That much money, we could teach Africa how to dance.


I'd like to teach the world to sing.
 
2012-07-22 03:14:23 AM
I'm starting to think that WWIII won't be a war fought between nations, but between classes. And while the wealthy can afford better weapons, who's going to fight for them? They're pretty heavily outnumbered.
 
2012-07-22 03:18:09 AM
Don't trickle down my back and tell me you're making it rain.
 
2012-07-22 03:20:56 AM

proteus_b: while of course they should be paying taxes on it like the rest of the 49-99 percentiles, isn't the implication of the headline, that it could ALL be "redistributed" a little bit unnerving?


I didn't read all of TFA so I can't say so definitively, but I'm not so sure that's quite what it was driving at.

Nevertheless, I don't find that prospect any more unnerving than the kind of overconcentration of wealth that appears to be indicated here.
 
2012-07-22 03:23:53 AM
And people wonder why Mitt is hiding his tax returns. I'm convinced part of it is because he doesn't pay that much in taxes due to his offshore tax dodging. Some Republicans may be OK with that but the average supporter who finds out they're paying a higher tax percentage during a recession than a guy worth more than $100M may decide to just sit this election out.
 
2012-07-22 03:25:02 AM
Chariset
So the Invisible Hand is squarely in the Invisible Pocket.

The Invisible Hand is busy distributing Invisible UFIAs.
 
2012-07-22 03:25:29 AM

Curse of the Goth Kids: ely, but I'm not so sure that's quite what it was driving at.

Nevertheless, I don't find that prospect any more unnerving than the kind of overconcentration of wealth that


Indeed. And in a way taxing IS redistributing - only instead of putting cash in the hands of the people, it goes toward shiat like roads, education, etc... you know, things the people NEED, and which the governments, both state and federal, do not fill their end of the bargain due to "budget reasons". The one place it SHOULDN'T be is hoarded by these stupid mother farkers.
 
2012-07-22 03:33:58 AM

Tor_Eckman: 404 page not found: proteus_b: while of course they should be paying taxes on it like the rest of the 49-99 percentiles, isn't the implication of the headline, that it could ALL be "redistributed" a little bit unnerving?

Class Warfare™

Right. According to this article, that's over already. We lost.


ABORTION! HOMOSEX! MEXICANS! WAR ON CHRISTMAS! GROUND ZERO MOSQUE! SOCIALISM! DRILL BABBY DRILL! TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY! OBAMACARE! goddamn i sound tired.
 
2012-07-22 03:35:13 AM

proteus_b: , isn't the implication of the headline, that it could ALL be "redistributed" a little bit unnerving?


Nope.

Institute a 100% worldwide tax on all personal assets over, say, $50 million via some kind of international treaty (still far less confiscatory than one of the French presidential candidates was arguing for in their last election), sieze the assets of everyone who refuses to pay, and use a small percentage of it to put some kind of well-regulated system in place to distribute it to the world's poorest places while making sure the shiathead dictators ruling those countries don't get their hands on any of it.

BONUS: Turn on Fox News the day after and watch Michele Bachmann et. al. go apoplectic about global socialism and UN conspiracies.
 
2012-07-22 03:37:20 AM

cman: I dont know anything about personal wealth being hidden, but I do know that many companies are doing it. Apple, for example, has billions of dollars in cash just sitting there. Apple refuses to bring the money back home until the tax is lower. Their argument is that they were already taxed once by the country where they sold their goods, so they shouldnt have to pay more.

I am thinking that maybe a sliding scale might be the best way to approach this. Make it something like if you return the money to the states within one month of being handed it, you get taxed at a lower rate. The longer it stays over seas, the higher the tax rate goes.


A tax holiday was granted for repatriation of foreign held profits during the Bush years with the promise that once the money was brought back into the US it could be used to create jobs. It turned out to be BS as the companies that participated instead used the funds to repurchase stock, pay dividends, and pay corporate bonuses and then continue to invest overseas.

The argument that they've already paid taxes on goods sold is completely bogus. They want a federal tax holiday because of state sales taxes, when said state taxes are paid by the consumers directly.

Your suggestion incents companies to repatriate profits with the threat of future taxes. I think a better solution would be to increase the corporate tax rate by x% for every dollar held offshore over a certain threshold. After a certain point, it simply becomes prohibitive to keep money overseas thus providing a strong disincentive to offshoring profits.
 
2012-07-22 03:37:50 AM
Some Friday in August we're gonna see a quiet release of tax returns. Or perhaps over Labor Day Weekend. Try and stay sober to see the fireworks, America
 
2012-07-22 03:39:28 AM

batcookie: Curse of the Goth Kids: ely, but I'm not so sure that's quite what it was driving at.

Nevertheless, I don't find that prospect any more unnerving than the kind of overconcentration of wealth that

Indeed. And in a way taxing IS redistributing - only instead of putting cash in the hands of the people, it goes toward shiat like roads, education, etc... you know, things the people NEED, and which the governments, both state and federal, do not fill their end of the bargain due to "budget reasons". The one place it SHOULDN'T be is hoarded by these stupid mother farkers.


The real problem I think is that wealth is power, and it's a particularly difficult kind of power because it's in the hands of people who aren't elected and who aren't constrained by any sort of written constitution or parliamentary procedure. I'm sure there are certain people on the right who are so far gone as to chastise me for saying this, but it's my firm belief that duly elected sovereign national governments SHOULD be the most powerful entities on the planet. There used to be a time when that wasn't a controversial statement at all.

What happens when individuals -- and here I do mean solitary individuals, and not great masses of generalized people -- tower head and shoulders over sovereign governments? Just look at this guy:

img822.imageshack.us

That man was a product of Saudi-style feudalism. Before his family cut him off, he had access to the kind of wealth that allowed him to buy off entire (third world, shiathole) countries. He did not give two farks about your first or second or third amendment rights. Nobody voted for this guy. He wasn't obligated to build infrastructure or educate anybody, he did precisely what he wanted: he murdered a ton of people. And for the first time, if not in history than in a long, long time indeed, the US found itself in the bizarre position of going to war not against some other country but against one super-wealthy Ur-Libertarian and the private terrorist enterprise he was able to put together.

When individuals have both the means and the will to carry out something of that order, there is a goddamn problem.
 
2012-07-22 03:39:38 AM
Who's money is it, Obama's?
 
2012-07-22 03:40:42 AM
Who is money is it, Obama's?
 
2012-07-22 03:48:24 AM

geek_mars: I'm starting to think that WWIII won't be a war fought between nations, but between classes. And while the wealthy can afford better weapons, who's going to fight for them? They're pretty heavily outnumbered.


4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-07-22 03:48:59 AM
Who is Obama? Is it money?
 
2012-07-22 03:51:54 AM

Noam Chimpsky: Who's money is it, Obama's?


img41.imageshack.us

It's Uncle Frank's money, and Uncle Frank says get your ass to bed.
 
2012-07-22 03:54:57 AM

cman: Their argument is that they were already taxed once by the country where they sold their goods, so they shouldnt have to pay more.


But they weren't taxed. Take the EU, for example, where the trick is called the Double Irish. Apple sets up two companies, Sales and Rights. Sales sells things, Rights licenses Sales to sell them. Both are Irish (or Dutch) companies, and Rights is only an Irish corporation on paper. It's really in Bermuda or the Caymans.

Sales pays 99% of profit to Rights, writing off the licensing costs on their taxes because they're paid to another company. Rights doesn't pay taxes on licensing income in Ireland, because the checks are deposited in Bermuda.

Bang! No taxes on any profit from any Apple device sold in Europe.

Google paid 2% tax (total) in 2010 using that trick, and nearly every multinational does exactly the same thing.
 
Displayed 50 of 308 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report