Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › NPR: “Offshore Tax Havens”
- This topic has 385 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 1 month ago by
CA renter.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 24, 2011 at 12:59 PM #681602March 24, 2011 at 1:24 PM #680463
afx114
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Your post also omits certain facts. One of those being that tax-exempt churches have enjoyed tremendous influence over politicians because they represent a well-organized, well-financed and vociferously vocal voting bloc that consistently delivers votes.[/quote]
FTFY
March 24, 2011 at 1:24 PM #680515Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Your post also omits certain facts. One of those being that tax-exempt churches have enjoyed tremendous influence over politicians because they represent a well-organized, well-financed and vociferously vocal voting bloc that consistently delivers votes.[/quote]
FTFY
March 24, 2011 at 1:24 PM #681131Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Your post also omits certain facts. One of those being that tax-exempt churches have enjoyed tremendous influence over politicians because they represent a well-organized, well-financed and vociferously vocal voting bloc that consistently delivers votes.[/quote]
FTFY
March 24, 2011 at 1:24 PM #681270Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Your post also omits certain facts. One of those being that tax-exempt churches have enjoyed tremendous influence over politicians because they represent a well-organized, well-financed and vociferously vocal voting bloc that consistently delivers votes.[/quote]
FTFY
March 24, 2011 at 1:24 PM #681621Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Your post also omits certain facts. One of those being that tax-exempt churches have enjoyed tremendous influence over politicians because they represent a well-organized, well-financed and vociferously vocal voting bloc that consistently delivers votes.[/quote]
FTFY
March 24, 2011 at 1:42 PM #680498Allan from Fallbrook
Participant[quote=afx114][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Your post also omits certain facts. One of those being that tax-exempt churches have enjoyed tremendous influence over politicians because they represent a well-organized, well-financed and vociferously vocal voting bloc that consistently delivers votes.[/quote]
FTFY[/quote]
Afx: I agree. Let’s strip Scientology’s tax exempt status forthwith!
March 24, 2011 at 1:42 PM #680550Participant[quote=afx114][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Your post also omits certain facts. One of those being that tax-exempt churches have enjoyed tremendous influence over politicians because they represent a well-organized, well-financed and vociferously vocal voting bloc that consistently delivers votes.[/quote]
FTFY[/quote]
Afx: I agree. Let’s strip Scientology’s tax exempt status forthwith!
March 24, 2011 at 1:42 PM #681166Participant[quote=afx114][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Your post also omits certain facts. One of those being that tax-exempt churches have enjoyed tremendous influence over politicians because they represent a well-organized, well-financed and vociferously vocal voting bloc that consistently delivers votes.[/quote]
FTFY[/quote]
Afx: I agree. Let’s strip Scientology’s tax exempt status forthwith!
March 24, 2011 at 1:42 PM #681305Participant[quote=afx114][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Your post also omits certain facts. One of those being that tax-exempt churches have enjoyed tremendous influence over politicians because they represent a well-organized, well-financed and vociferously vocal voting bloc that consistently delivers votes.[/quote]
FTFY[/quote]
Afx: I agree. Let’s strip Scientology’s tax exempt status forthwith!
March 24, 2011 at 1:42 PM #681656Participant[quote=afx114][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Your post also omits certain facts. One of those being that tax-exempt churches have enjoyed tremendous influence over politicians because they represent a well-organized, well-financed and vociferously vocal voting bloc that consistently delivers votes.[/quote]
FTFY[/quote]
Afx: I agree. Let’s strip Scientology’s tax exempt status forthwith!
March 24, 2011 at 4:59 PM #680523CA renter
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=CONCHO]
As for the silly comments that there is no difference between some crooked unions shaking someone down for tens of millions and hedge funds and bankers ass-raping the entire country to the tune of trillions, these are orders of magnitude apart. [/quote]CONCHO: Orders of magnitude? Not quite. While I agree with Gandalf that proportionality is key here, there are estimates that put the total unfunded liability (for all states) for pensions and benefits at nearly $1.5 Trillion. That isn’t “orders of magnitude”.
Your post also omits certain facts. One of those being that public sector unions have enjoyed tremendous influence over politicians because they represent a well-organized, well-financed and vociferously vocal voting bloc that consistently delivers votes. This influence has translated into expensive and unsustainable pension and benefit programs and the bill is coming due.
The other fact is that state budget deficits do exist. Are the public sector unions responsible for all of them? Nope, but they are responsible in part and this needs to be acknowledged and dealt with. Again, this is not a demonization of public sector WORKERS, but public sector UNIONS. There is a difference.
So, using your “getting eaten by a bear” example: Wall Street has hold of your leg, but public sector unions, metro political machines, etc have hold of your arm.
$1.5 Trillion ain’t exactly mosquitoes.[/quote]
Allan,
How many people is that $1.5T (using your number) being divided among, and to whom (people who are actually doing the work)? How are the trillions that have been diverted to the financial sector being divided, and to whom? Did they do any “work” to deserve this largess? Does one outlay benefit society more than the other? Can we even compare the two?
Why are trillions being directed into the financial sector when they were the ones who caused the pension crisis in the first place?
Not saying we don’t need to make some changes in the public sector, but you cannot make the argument that the financial sector is somehow “worthy” of bailouts…bailouts that are coming at the expense of public sector workers.
March 24, 2011 at 4:59 PM #680577Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=CONCHO]
As for the silly comments that there is no difference between some crooked unions shaking someone down for tens of millions and hedge funds and bankers ass-raping the entire country to the tune of trillions, these are orders of magnitude apart. [/quote]CONCHO: Orders of magnitude? Not quite. While I agree with Gandalf that proportionality is key here, there are estimates that put the total unfunded liability (for all states) for pensions and benefits at nearly $1.5 Trillion. That isn’t “orders of magnitude”.
Your post also omits certain facts. One of those being that public sector unions have enjoyed tremendous influence over politicians because they represent a well-organized, well-financed and vociferously vocal voting bloc that consistently delivers votes. This influence has translated into expensive and unsustainable pension and benefit programs and the bill is coming due.
The other fact is that state budget deficits do exist. Are the public sector unions responsible for all of them? Nope, but they are responsible in part and this needs to be acknowledged and dealt with. Again, this is not a demonization of public sector WORKERS, but public sector UNIONS. There is a difference.
So, using your “getting eaten by a bear” example: Wall Street has hold of your leg, but public sector unions, metro political machines, etc have hold of your arm.
$1.5 Trillion ain’t exactly mosquitoes.[/quote]
Allan,
How many people is that $1.5T (using your number) being divided among, and to whom (people who are actually doing the work)? How are the trillions that have been diverted to the financial sector being divided, and to whom? Did they do any “work” to deserve this largess? Does one outlay benefit society more than the other? Can we even compare the two?
Why are trillions being directed into the financial sector when they were the ones who caused the pension crisis in the first place?
Not saying we don’t need to make some changes in the public sector, but you cannot make the argument that the financial sector is somehow “worthy” of bailouts…bailouts that are coming at the expense of public sector workers.
March 24, 2011 at 4:59 PM #681194Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=CONCHO]
As for the silly comments that there is no difference between some crooked unions shaking someone down for tens of millions and hedge funds and bankers ass-raping the entire country to the tune of trillions, these are orders of magnitude apart. [/quote]CONCHO: Orders of magnitude? Not quite. While I agree with Gandalf that proportionality is key here, there are estimates that put the total unfunded liability (for all states) for pensions and benefits at nearly $1.5 Trillion. That isn’t “orders of magnitude”.
Your post also omits certain facts. One of those being that public sector unions have enjoyed tremendous influence over politicians because they represent a well-organized, well-financed and vociferously vocal voting bloc that consistently delivers votes. This influence has translated into expensive and unsustainable pension and benefit programs and the bill is coming due.
The other fact is that state budget deficits do exist. Are the public sector unions responsible for all of them? Nope, but they are responsible in part and this needs to be acknowledged and dealt with. Again, this is not a demonization of public sector WORKERS, but public sector UNIONS. There is a difference.
So, using your “getting eaten by a bear” example: Wall Street has hold of your leg, but public sector unions, metro political machines, etc have hold of your arm.
$1.5 Trillion ain’t exactly mosquitoes.[/quote]
Allan,
How many people is that $1.5T (using your number) being divided among, and to whom (people who are actually doing the work)? How are the trillions that have been diverted to the financial sector being divided, and to whom? Did they do any “work” to deserve this largess? Does one outlay benefit society more than the other? Can we even compare the two?
Why are trillions being directed into the financial sector when they were the ones who caused the pension crisis in the first place?
Not saying we don’t need to make some changes in the public sector, but you cannot make the argument that the financial sector is somehow “worthy” of bailouts…bailouts that are coming at the expense of public sector workers.
March 24, 2011 at 4:59 PM #681332Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=CONCHO]
As for the silly comments that there is no difference between some crooked unions shaking someone down for tens of millions and hedge funds and bankers ass-raping the entire country to the tune of trillions, these are orders of magnitude apart. [/quote]CONCHO: Orders of magnitude? Not quite. While I agree with Gandalf that proportionality is key here, there are estimates that put the total unfunded liability (for all states) for pensions and benefits at nearly $1.5 Trillion. That isn’t “orders of magnitude”.
Your post also omits certain facts. One of those being that public sector unions have enjoyed tremendous influence over politicians because they represent a well-organized, well-financed and vociferously vocal voting bloc that consistently delivers votes. This influence has translated into expensive and unsustainable pension and benefit programs and the bill is coming due.
The other fact is that state budget deficits do exist. Are the public sector unions responsible for all of them? Nope, but they are responsible in part and this needs to be acknowledged and dealt with. Again, this is not a demonization of public sector WORKERS, but public sector UNIONS. There is a difference.
So, using your “getting eaten by a bear” example: Wall Street has hold of your leg, but public sector unions, metro political machines, etc have hold of your arm.
$1.5 Trillion ain’t exactly mosquitoes.[/quote]
Allan,
How many people is that $1.5T (using your number) being divided among, and to whom (people who are actually doing the work)? How are the trillions that have been diverted to the financial sector being divided, and to whom? Did they do any “work” to deserve this largess? Does one outlay benefit society more than the other? Can we even compare the two?
Why are trillions being directed into the financial sector when they were the ones who caused the pension crisis in the first place?
Not saying we don’t need to make some changes in the public sector, but you cannot make the argument that the financial sector is somehow “worthy” of bailouts…bailouts that are coming at the expense of public sector workers.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.