Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
From existing ... no one I guess.Who has the authority to keep them from existing?
Ya know, some countries realize that rich people are actually beneficial to a society.
Money on deposit in a Caribbean paradise can be, in turn, lent to small businesses that will provide jobs as long as government doesn't spend it on worthless social programs first.
Does the fact not every rich man is an honest man truly have any bearing on the argument? Do we have the right as a country to destroy another country because we do not like it's tax system?From existing ... no one I guess.Who has the authority to keep them from existing?
Ya know, some countries realize that rich people are actually beneficial to a society.
Money on deposit in a Caribbean paradise can be, in turn, lent to small businesses that will provide jobs as long as government doesn't spend it on worthless social programs first.
From banning financial transactions with them : every single nation.
Drug dealers, human traffickers, weapon dealers , and people who have become rich through legitimate means, they all love fiscal paradises. Not every rich is a honest man.
Fine, so far so good. But then how would you transfer your money elsewhere. I mean , it's not like there's any real investment going in Barbados. Is there? Most of the money gets ther through wire. The amount of money a citizen can transfer using cash or gold is rather limited.I can't see how anyone could restrict my right to travel to, let's say Barbados and open a bank or brokerage account with my own money.
From Kent V Dulles SCOTUS 1958:
"The right to travel is a part of the 'liberty' of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. If that "liberty" is to be regulated, it must be pursuant to the law-making functions of the Congress. . . . . Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, . . . may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values."
Does the fact not every rich man is an honest man truly have any bearing on the argument? Do we have the right as a country to destroy another country because we do not like it's tax system?From existing ... no one I guess.Who has the authority to keep them from existing?
Ya know, some countries realize that rich people are actually beneficial to a society.
Money on deposit in a Caribbean paradise can be, in turn, lent to small businesses that will provide jobs as long as government doesn't spend it on worthless social programs first.
From banning financial transactions with them : every single nation.
Drug dealers, human traffickers, weapon dealers , and people who have become rich through legitimate means, they all love fiscal paradises. Not every rich is a honest man.
Okay, so now you suggest STEALING through a MANDATED TAX. Who are you giving this STOLEN wealth to?Does the fact not every rich man is an honest man truly have any bearing on the argument? Do we have the right as a country to destroy another country because we do not like it's tax system?From existing ... no one I guess.Who has the authority to keep them from existing?
Ya know, some countries realize that rich people are actually beneficial to a society.
Money on deposit in a Caribbean paradise can be, in turn, lent to small businesses that will provide jobs as long as government doesn't spend it on worthless social programs first.
From banning financial transactions with them : every single nation.
Drug dealers, human traffickers, weapon dealers , and people who have become rich through legitimate means, they all love fiscal paradises. Not every rich is a honest man.
Or political system fo that matter ? If you want a historical answer to that question the answer would be YES !.
But rather than destroy , it would be better to ban ... ore more likely to put a tax on every single transaction made with a fiscal paradise.
Okay, so now you suggest STEALING through a MANDATED TAX. Who are you giving this STOLEN wealth to?Does the fact not every rich man is an honest man truly have any bearing on the argument? Do we have the right as a country to destroy another country because we do not like it's tax system?From existing ... no one I guess.Who has the authority to keep them from existing?
Ya know, some countries realize that rich people are actually beneficial to a society.
Money on deposit in a Caribbean paradise can be, in turn, lent to small businesses that will provide jobs as long as government doesn't spend it on worthless social programs first.
From banning financial transactions with them : every single nation.
Drug dealers, human traffickers, weapon dealers , and people who have become rich through legitimate means, they all love fiscal paradises. Not every rich is a honest man.
Or political system fo that matter ? If you want a historical answer to that question the answer would be YES !.
But rather than destroy , it would be better to ban ... ore more likely to put a tax on every single transaction made with a fiscal paradise.
Huh????? No real investment in Barbados?Fine, so far so good. But then how would you transfer your money elsewhere. I mean , it's not like there's any real investment going in Barbados. Is there? Most of the money gets ther through wire. The amount of money a citizen can transfer using cash or gold is rather limited.I can't see how anyone could restrict my right to travel to, let's say Barbados and open a bank or brokerage account with my own money.
From Kent V Dulles SCOTUS 1958:
"The right to travel is a part of the 'liberty' of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. If that "liberty" is to be regulated, it must be pursuant to the law-making functions of the Congress. . . . . Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, . . . may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values."
Are you 7?Okay, so now you suggest STEALING through a MANDATED TAX. Who are you giving this STOLEN wealth to?Does the fact not every rich man is an honest man truly have any bearing on the argument? Do we have the right as a country to destroy another country because we do not like it's tax system?From existing ... no one I guess.Who has the authority to keep them from existing?
Ya know, some countries realize that rich people are actually beneficial to a society.
Money on deposit in a Caribbean paradise can be, in turn, lent to small businesses that will provide jobs as long as government doesn't spend it on worthless social programs first.
From banning financial transactions with them : every single nation.
Drug dealers, human traffickers, weapon dealers , and people who have become rich through legitimate means, they all love fiscal paradises. Not every rich is a honest man.
Or political system fo that matter ? If you want a historical answer to that question the answer would be YES !.
But rather than destroy , it would be better to ban ... ore more likely to put a tax on every single transaction made with a fiscal paradise.
Stealing? Oh , taxing = stealing ? Hmmm kind of.
Ok , let's put it this way . You know as a sure fact that if you go through a certain street a gang will steal your money.
So what do you do ? Would you cross that street or would rather go through the aforementioned street?
Mind you , every single time you purchase a good or service you get stolen . No one makes a big fuzz about it.
The three main business in the world are weapons, drugs and human trafficking. Guess where all that money gets cleaned? But apparently you have no problem supporting the infrastructure for these fine entrepreneurs.
Other than the self evident purpose of serving as centers for tax evasion and money laundering.
And more importantly why are they allowed to exist.
I can't see how anyone could restrict my right to travel to, let's say Barbados and open a bank or brokerage account with my own money.
From Kent V Dulles SCOTUS 1958:
"The right to travel is a part of the 'liberty' of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. If that "liberty" is to be regulated, it must be pursuant to the law-making functions of the Congress. . . . . Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, . . . may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values."
I can't see how anyone could restrict my right to travel to, let's say Barbados and open a bank or brokerage account with my own money.
From Kent V Dulles SCOTUS 1958:
"The right to travel is a part of the 'liberty' of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. If that "liberty" is to be regulated, it must be pursuant to the law-making functions of the Congress. . . . . Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, . . . may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values."
Just as long as you file the required disclosures of foreign bank accounts and investments each year. The penalties are generally 50%--100% of the value of the accounts with no "good faith" exception.
Oh sure Ed, such nice locations have been widely used by notable figures as Sadam Hussein, Idi Amin, the Bin Laden family as well as the mexican and columbian cartels , just to name some of the notable business and job creators.Other than the self evident purpose of serving as centers for tax evasion and money laundering.
And more importantly why are they allowed to exist.
they are allowed to exist to attract businesses, create jobs, and save lives.
A child would know that.
They are supply-side havens,i.e., libs dont interfere and people get jobs and eat.
Does that include the half ton of gold I have buried in Brazil?
Oh sure Ed, such nice locations have been widely used by notable figures as Sadam Hussein, Idi Amin, the Bin Laden family as well as the mexican and columbian cartels , just to name some of the notable business and job creators.Other than the self evident purpose of serving as centers for tax evasion and money laundering.
And more importantly why are they allowed to exist.
they are allowed to exist to attract businesses, create jobs, and save lives.
A child would know that.
They are supply-side havens,i.e., libs dont interfere and people get jobs and eat.
Due to the opacity of those paradises it is very hard to track the dirty money that comes from illicit activities.
Say Ed, how exactly do you propose that dirty money is tracked ? Once it gets to a fiscal paradise it becomes extremely hard to track.What a surprise, the low IQ lib culture Nazi has found yet another reason to centralize power in liberal Washington. Without the Snowden revelations we would have no idea of the extent of liberal spying on Americans. Why not move to Cuba where you belong before it turns capitalist and people start getting rich.
Hope you're not a gun or boat owner. Both are extremely threatening to a govt with a monopoly on the violence you love so much.
its very important that your Nazi lib big brother friends keep track of everything isn't it? Freedom means nothing to a liberal. You don't belong in America. As a typical liberal you simply lack the IQ to understand your own country and what made it the greatest in human history by far..they want to keep accounts secret and untrackable, .
