Ponderable
- Thread starter Bruddah IZ
- Start date
I got your 'dude' hangin'...
I responded to your post Wezzer, but if you need help....well I'm your Huckleberry.
How much money is in off shore accounts? Billions? Trillions? I've read numbers like 32 TRILLION...
"In 2011, states lost approximately $39.8 billion in tax revenues from corporations and wealthy individuals who sheltered money in foreign tax havens. Multinational corporations account for more than $26 billion of the lost tax revenue, and wealthy individuals account for the rest."
http://www.uspirgedfund.org/reports/usf/hidden-cost-offshore-tax-havens
Wez
DA
I got your 'dude' hangin'...
I responded to your post Wezzer, but if you need help....well I'm your Huckleberry.
Talkin tough like that must really make you feel good, you do it a lot. Internet tough guys... and please stop using that term from the great movie "Tombstone", it soils it's value when you keep using it.
Wow, thanks for alerting me to the existence of offshore money. Please now link it to a discussion about a flat tax system. I clearly defined my statements, it seems like you are just throwing out random bits of information...
DUDE!
You ask me to "stand by statement", so I did.
Moving money off shore is in reference to the rich moving their money to countries with "attractive tax systems"
32 TRILLION DOLLARS...
Keep taxing them 'till they are completely fed up and then you have the drinking in a bar story in real life.
You know the one where the rich guy who pays 59% of the of the bill and then gets his ass stomped? It's a good analogy.
I didn't think I would frighten you by mocking your use of the word dude.
I'll unhang your dude....I'll try to remember how sensitive you are. Dude.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Elon Musk's growing empire is fueled by $4.9 billion in government subsidies
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html
Apparently that is as far as your tweeter read.
Bruddah IZ
DA
About 25,400 results (0.59 seconds)
Bruddah IZ
DA
Apparently the good ole U.S.A. is a nice little tax haven.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html
Bruddah IZ
DA
The rich are actually still investing in the Taxpayer Bailout Capital of the World, the U.S.A. The Finance guy, Wezdumb, should know that.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Wez
DA
Yet another problem with open or concealed carry, when approaching a scene, how do Police know what the status is? Crime with a gun, not allowed to own a gun, legal gun but not open or concealed, open but not concealed, legal both open and concealed? Being a cop must be tough in rough neighborhoods with lax gun laws...
Bruddah IZ
DA
Are you suggesting the $4 billion was a cash payment to Tesla?
Bruddah IZ
DA
Bruddah IZ
DA
Are you suggesting the $4 billion was cash that Tesla would have spent in the absence of a $4 billion subsidy?
Did you actually read the article you linked?
Bruddah IZ
DA
Yes. Did you? If so, answer the question.
Bruddah IZ
DA
… is from page 50 of Arnold Kling’s excellent new book, Specialization and Trade: A Re-introduction to Economics (original emphasis):
What we should be comparing is not the existing market configuration with an ideal based on a simple model but the market process of error correction (without subsidies to Tesla) with the political process of error correction (subsidies to Tesla).
If the above sounds trivially true, it is – in a sense. But in another sense it’s not trivially true, because many economists – including Nobel laureates such as Joseph Stiglitz, George Akerlof, Paul Krugman, and Robert Shiller – routinely compare static, real-world market (no subsidies to Tesla) situations with idealized, imagined political outcomes and then conclude that the market has failed and that, as a result, more power and resources must be turned over to state officials....(to give subsidies to Tesla)
..............................
Anybody surprised?
Anybody gonna be surprised when it's Iran instead of North Korea, Persian Gulf instead of South Korea & Middle East instead of Korean Peninsula?
UNITED NATIONS — North Korea's foreign minister condemned the United States on Friday for flying supersonic bombers over South Korea earlier this week and vowed his country will strengthen its nuclear capabilities in defiance of multiple U.N. Security Council resolutions.
In a defiant speech before the U.N. General Assembly, Ri Yong Ho said the Korean Peninsula "has now been turned into the world's most dangerous hot spot which can even ignite the outbreak of a nuclear war." He blamed the United States and "its hostile policy" against North Korea.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...uclear-forces/ar-BBwyj5U?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
Anybody surprised?
Anybody gonna be surprised when it's Iran instead of North Korea, Persian Gulf instead of South Korea & Middle East instead of Korean Peninsula?
UNITED NATIONS — North Korea's foreign minister condemned the United States on Friday for flying supersonic bombers over South Korea earlier this week and vowed his country will strengthen its nuclear capabilities in defiance of multiple U.N. Security Council resolutions.
In a defiant speech before the U.N. General Assembly, Ri Yong Ho said the Korean Peninsula "has now been turned into the world's most dangerous hot spot which can even ignite the outbreak of a nuclear war." He blamed the United States and "its hostile policy" against North Korea.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...uclear-forces/ar-BBwyj5U?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
Bruddah IZ
DA
http://www.techpolicydaily.com/communications/washingtons-weird-war-free/
The latest victim in the war on free
Unlike India, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has not yet prohibited free data in the US. But the agency has been investigating the practice for 10 months, so far without resolution. Still, according to FCC Commissioner O’Rielly, the FCC inquiry itself has led companies to keep free data offerings on the drawing board, not in the marketplace.
Not to be outdone, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is threatening to shut down the University of California-Berkeley’s free online educational offerings. In an investigation unrelated to free data, DOJ says Berkeley’s numerous and heterogeneous online courses don’t comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and must be fixed or taken down. DOJ claims the multitude of free course videos don’t all contain proper captioning or sound or video quality.
Berkeley replied that it will cooperate with the investigation but also wondered whether it could continue offering the courses to the public:
“In many cases the requirements proposed by the department would require the university to implement extremely expensive measures to continue to make these resources available to the public for free. We believe that in a time of substantial budget deficits and shrinking state financial support, our first obligation is to use our limited resources to support our enrolled students. Therefore, we must strongly consider the unenviable option of whether to remove content from public access.”
The irony is thick. We are constantly trying to find ways to improve access (often by reducing cost) to both mobile connectivity and higher education. What could be more important in our world than knowledge and connectivity? Yet Washington is threatening to outlaw two innovations that do just that — improve access to education and to the internet.
In each case, the free offerings are expanding access to vast audiences who otherwise would not enjoy the opportunity. Zero rating reduces the cost of mobile so that (1) existing subscribers can access more content and (2) non-subscribers become subscribers. In the case of Berkeley (and many other universities), people across the nation and the world gain access to courses that normally come with a $40,000 tuition bill.
The latest victim in the war on free
Unlike India, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has not yet prohibited free data in the US. But the agency has been investigating the practice for 10 months, so far without resolution. Still, according to FCC Commissioner O’Rielly, the FCC inquiry itself has led companies to keep free data offerings on the drawing board, not in the marketplace.
Not to be outdone, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is threatening to shut down the University of California-Berkeley’s free online educational offerings. In an investigation unrelated to free data, DOJ says Berkeley’s numerous and heterogeneous online courses don’t comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and must be fixed or taken down. DOJ claims the multitude of free course videos don’t all contain proper captioning or sound or video quality.
Berkeley replied that it will cooperate with the investigation but also wondered whether it could continue offering the courses to the public:
“In many cases the requirements proposed by the department would require the university to implement extremely expensive measures to continue to make these resources available to the public for free. We believe that in a time of substantial budget deficits and shrinking state financial support, our first obligation is to use our limited resources to support our enrolled students. Therefore, we must strongly consider the unenviable option of whether to remove content from public access.”
The irony is thick. We are constantly trying to find ways to improve access (often by reducing cost) to both mobile connectivity and higher education. What could be more important in our world than knowledge and connectivity? Yet Washington is threatening to outlaw two innovations that do just that — improve access to education and to the internet.
In each case, the free offerings are expanding access to vast audiences who otherwise would not enjoy the opportunity. Zero rating reduces the cost of mobile so that (1) existing subscribers can access more content and (2) non-subscribers become subscribers. In the case of Berkeley (and many other universities), people across the nation and the world gain access to courses that normally come with a $40,000 tuition bill.
Wez
DA
You still don't get it, if Iran wants nukes, we can't stop them and weren't stopping them. Now we've at least delayed them and added some transparency.
You continually imply that the Iran deal is giving them nukes... it's plain wrong.