Paradise papers

[jesmu84]

Thoughts?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41876942

Seems like ultra-rich individuals and corporations aren't paying their fair share

[GooooMarquette]

Thoughts?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41876942

Seems like ultra-rich individuals and corporations aren't paying their fair share

Hardly a shock that the 1%ers get away with things the rest of us couldn't imagine, but interesting to see some of the details.

[Jockey]

Just give Putin the keys to the White House and be done with it.

[Hards Alumni]

Thoughts?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41876942

Seems like ultra-rich individuals and corporations aren't paying their fair share

If we just lower the corporate tax rate maybe they'll come back and pay their fair share!

/s

[MU82]

Our dear leader talks constantly about "extreme vetting," which is suspect given that he has not shown any ability to extremely vet his own appointees.

Hillary got in trouble (and rightly so) for using the term "deplorables" to describe the orange sheeple, but it's a pretty fair word to describe a whole lot of his appointees.

The beautiful thing is that when the shyte hits the fan, he claims to hardly know these guys - whom months earlier he often described as "good guys" or "valuable assets," etc. It was also pretty telling that not long after bragging that he "remembers everything," he claims to have forgotten all about a meeting that took place - with him present - involving Russia and the election.

[forgetful]

Will the Justice Department go after some of these people who are US citizens?  Particularly those illegally investing in business with Russian entities that are on the banned list.

[muwarrior69]

Will the Justice Department go after some of these people who are US citizens?  Particularly those illegally investing in business with Russian entities that are on the banned list.

It depends if some of these people donate to the RNC or the DNC.

[Tugg Speedman]

If we just lower the corporate tax rate maybe they'll come back and pay their fair share!

/s

I know you’re trying to be funny, but you are exactly right.  And as long as “tax the rich” continues to be viable, they will never pay.

[Tugg Speedman]

Will the Justice Department go after some of these people who are US citizens?  Particularly those illegally investing in business with Russian entities that are on the banned list.

Most are not US, like the Panama papers revealed last year.

And the Justice department cannot touch them, not powerful enough.  And this is not a “Trump will not go after them thing.”  All this happened under Obama.

So move on, interesting story and nothing will come of it.

The Boston Consulting Group says $10tn is held offshore. That's about the equivalent of the gross domestic products of the UK, Japan and France - combined. It may also be a conservative estimate.

[tower912]

Old news.   And no, I don't think there is a solution. 

[B. McBannerson]

Thoughts?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41876942

Seems like ultra-rich individuals and corporations aren't paying their fair share

Thoughts?  Hypocrisy.  I expect one side to do it, because that's part of their mantra to lower taxes, get out of paying it.  The other side preaches often to raise taxes, yet here they are hiding them offshore and having everyone else's taxes raised through policy and laws they can persuade or enact.  That's troubling.

[Hards Alumni]

Thoughts?  Hypocrisy.  I expect one side to do it, because that's part of their mantra to lower taxes, get out of paying it.  The other side preaches often to raise taxes, yet here they are hiding them offshore and having everyone else's taxes raised through policy and laws they can persuade or enact.  That's troubling.

See, that's your problem.  You can only see hypocrisy when it is the 'other side'.

I can see it for what it is.  Freeze everyone's assets, try them in court, and send the offenders to jail.  I don't care if they're R's or D's.  They broke the law so they should have their feet to the fire.

YOU ARE THE MOST DIVISIVE PERSON ON THIS ENTIRE BOARD AND YOU SHOULDN'T BE HERE.  YOU'RE EXACTLY THE PERSON YOU RAIL AGAINST AND DRONE ON ABOUT AD INFINITUM.

[GB Warrior]

I know you’re trying to be funny, but you are exactly right.  And as long as “tax the rich” continues to be viable, they will never pay.

This is a bad take on human behavior in this setting.  As if they were pushed to move money offshore when the tax burden became just a wee-bit too high. Like a scorned lover, thrust into the arms of a hotter tax haven.

Some people will try to cheat the system, whatever that system is and no matter how much money we're talking.

[jesmu84]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41889787

Can't wait for when we lower corporate taxes or have a one-time tax holiday. I'm sure massive corporations like apple will definitely bring back all their profits to get taxed

[rocket surgeon]

Just give Putin the keys to the White House and be done with it.

why?  all he's got to do is hack in to a bathroom server and he's got all the info he needs laughing all the way to bank uranium

[Hards Alumni]

why?  all he's got to do is hack in to a bathroom server and he's got all the info he needs laughing all the way to bank uranium

Incoherent

[rocket surgeon]

Incoherent

to some?  i guess so

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

to some?  i guess so

To most, sir.

[B. McBannerson]

To most, sir.

Only to those not following along.   

[jesmu84]

To most, sir.

I think he was referencing Hillary's private email server. Of course, we've since learned that many on the current admin are using private servers.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I think he was referencing Hillary's private email server. Of course, we've since learned that many on the current admin are using private servers.

Oh I'm well aware it has something to do with HRC. It's still written in an incoherent fashion.

[Hards Alumni]

Oh I'm well aware it has something to do with HRC. It's still written in an incoherent fashion.

Exactly.

[Lighthouse 84]

I think he was referencing Hillary's private email server. Of course, we've since learned that many on the current admin are using private servers e-mail addresses.

I think you meant this.  There is a difference.

[jficke13]

[MU82]

There are only 2 choices with Trump and his choices of so many appointees with criminal and/or conflict-of-interest ties to Russia:

1. He knew but he didn't care, figuring that Americans were too stupid to discover the truth or, like him, wouldn't care when the truth inevitably came out.

2. He is both incompetent and has horrendous judgment.

[B. McBannerson]

There are only 2 choices with Trump and his choices of so many appointees with criminal and/or conflict-of-interest ties to Russia:

1. He knew but he didn't care, figuring that Americans were too stupid to discover the truth or, like him, wouldn't care when the truth inevitably came out.

2. He is both incompetent and has horrendous judgment.

How's Donna Brazille doing these days?  I heard she dedicated her new book to a patriot and also said this weekend that she is scared and fearful.  Why would she be? 

[GGGG]

How's Donna Brazille doing these days?  I heard she dedicated her new book to a patriot and also said this weekend that she is scared and fearful.  Why would she be? 

She a black woman in America?

[Lighthouse 84]

There are only 2 choices with Trump and his choices of so many appointees with criminal and/or conflict-of-interest ties to Russia:

1. He knew but he didn't care, figuring that Americans were too stupid to discover the truth or, like him, wouldn't care when the truth inevitably came out.

2. He is both incompetent and has horrendous judgment.

This post reminds me of when we had the Politics Board.  Your post so clearly cries out for a response about there being only two choices with HRC and her a) choices to have a private e-mail server, 2) choices to buy the DNC so she would be assured of being the democratic nominee, c) choices to stay with Bill Clinton after his sexual assaults and other actions against women, 4) choices to pay or control payments to Russia to control the election and/or steer money to the Clinton Foundation, etc etc etc, but I won’t.  Politics aren’t allowed on the Board and Rocky and Topper did away with the Politics Board.

Can we either do away with blatant political posts or bring back the Politics Board? 

[tower912]

This is a politics free zone.

[jficke13]

Could maybe create a thread where the 5-6 people who mostly just snipe at each other over the same tired strawmen can do so ad infinatum?

[jesmu84]

Could maybe create a thread where the 5-6 people who mostly just snipe at each other over the same tired strawmen can do so ad infinatum?

Honestly, that would be kind of awesome. Everyone gets popcorn for viewing

[Hards Alumni]

Could maybe create a thread where the 5-6 people who mostly just snipe at each other over the same tired strawmen can do so ad infinatum?

Or maybe they could go to another website where politics is okay!

[Benny B]

Or maybe they could go to another website where politics is okay!

That kind of defeats the purpose of interwebs politicking though.  The whole point is to spread influence, misinformation, agendas, fear, uncertainty, doubt, etc. (and silence the opposition) in order to drive turnout.  A board dedicated to debating political issues doesn't further the cause for either side.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Could maybe create a thread where the 5-6 people who mostly just snipe at each other over the same tired strawmen can do so ad infinatum?

What if we set up political cage matches? Two posters enter. A neutral third party gives them a topic. They get three pages to use every strawman, ad hominem, reducto ad absurdem, and hyperbole to make their point and discredit the other. The rest of us watch and then vote on the superior internet loudmouth. Winner gets the glory, loser takes the week long ban for talking politics.

[GB Warrior]

Could maybe create a thread where the 5-6 people who mostly just snipe at each other over the same tired strawmen can do so ad infinatum?

This doesn't happen in the primary board too?

[Hards Alumni]

That kind of defeats the purpose of interwebs politicking though.  The whole point is to spread influence, misinformation, agendas, fear, uncertainty, doubt, etc. (and silence the opposition) in order to drive turnout.  A board dedicated to debating political issues doesn't further the cause for either side.

Wise man.