"Are Whites Racially Opressed?" a.k.a. "How Hard Can CNN Troll?"

[Drewbacca]

The only reason there is "money to be made" was that these people bought up all the politicians and helped them create a system where it can happen. Poor ass crackers making $30,000 cheered it on because they don't like hippies.

But it's not some natural law that the Cayman Islands is the place to park your billions.

It's incredibly hard to stop this from happening. Not because the law was changed, but because business has gone international. The borders are less meaningful for many reasons. The point still stands, though. So long as money isn't traceable or punishable out of your jurisdiction there can never be the kind of real reform you want for society. Knowing that what is the goal? To woo business back or slap your rich up to make a point.

The point of this thread is that the CNN article was dumb.

We're all talking about it. CNN is winning.

[Diff-chan]

It's incredibly hard to stop this from happening. Not because the law was changed, but because business has gone international. The borders are less meaningful for many reasons. The point still stands, though. So long as money isn't traceable or punishable out of your jurisdiction there can never be the kind of real reform you want for society. Knowing that what is the goal? To woo business back or slap your rich up to make a point.

I don't want to "woo business back" if it means they are coming back here to fuck us in the ass. That's "Third Way" Clinton-speak and it's done us no good. They've gotten their ass kissed enough and they still play the victim (witness all the bank CEOs whining during the Dodd-Frank debate, after taxpayers bailed them out).

They can stay over there and fuck the Chinese all they want for all I care. Of course, they won't do that, because the guys in charge will be in front of a firing squad if they go one step too far.

I want businesses and the people running them to act like responsible parts of society. As you've pointed out, the "psychological profile" of a "corporation person" is sociopathic, so that needs to be reigned in.

[Drewbacca]

You miss my point by a large margin. But at any rate I'll address yours as well.

1. Simple bank statement audits and cash flow statements can find massive amounts of cash. We just choose to allow the off shore accounting/banking/tax practices to happen. Banks generally know where every dollar comes from and goes to these days. It's easy to lie about liabilities and transfer them around. Cash tends to leave a trail. Saying that increasing taxes will only cause the rich to hide their cash better is a non-issue because if it was that easy to hide cash then rich would simply hide all of it and pay 0 taxes. This does not happen so we can assume that even offshoring their accounts with foreign firms then domestic firms will have the appropriate wire transfer data and debit/credits to track it down. Once again speaking more less about state taxes and personal income taxes and not necessarily corporate taxes since we know the Fed doesn't need taxes really. Labor is another economic issue entirely that is a blackhole of debate as far as I'm concerned so I'll avoid it for now.

This is only true if holdings and corporate umbrella businesses don't exist. There is also a really defined difference between revenue and profit. A LOT of people spend in to a modest deficit to avoid any taxation (NPO's do this openly). By the numbers that's not illegal because you payed your people - that's their income. If you pay someone who's technically working out of a foreign place of business that government takes the cut, not the IRS. Easy solution would be to make it so the IRS takes a cut. But then that discourages doing business internationally as you're taxed 2 or more times per job/service. The world just got a whole lot smaller and less competitive.

2. A balancing act will eventually (hopefully occur).

3. "As it stands now when you tax the rich you also penalize the income of middle and small business operations too." is basically stating that either you're willing to let the rich continue to extort an ever increasing amount of wealth from the poor and middle class, or that you really believe that 0% taxes is all that any one should pay ever. Do the rich create most of the jobs? Yes! Should we bend over backwards to accomadate the rich because they might take jobs/cash away if we threaten their power/positions? Absolutely not!

I don't make the distinction of knowing the answers to solving this crisis short of leveling the playing field across the world. Just that as it is now the rich, unfortunately, DO have the power position. Because they hold the commodity you desire (money).

They can stay over there and fuck the Chinese all they want for all I care. Of course, they won't do that, because the guys in charge will be in front of a firing squad if they go one step too far.

I wish this were true, but nobody in China who is bringing business above production-level jobs to their economy is going to be facing any firing squad. The issue here is that China is a corporate darling because they allow slave labour (and it is) and the government to control the market in their favor. Socialism is better for business.

[gamevet]

It has nothing to do with pride. It has to do with watching whites pass right by you even though they don't do shit to earn it. Simply being white already gives off a positive impression. I'm dealing with this at work now.

It works both ways though. The University of North Texas will hire contractors that are owned by a minority, because that is their standard for hiring. The company I work for got in on the contract, because the president of the company chose to use his wife's name as the owner, even though she has nothing to do with the day to day operations. The benefits of being a company owned by a minority, outweigh those of being owned by a white male.

[Fe 26]

If you only see benefits as tangible things on paper, yeah.

But white people have a ton of intangibles going for them that others don't.