Comments by "" (@timogul) on "TLDR News EU"
channel.
-
95
-
78
-
77
-
75
-
If Russia is worried that NATO might attack them on humanitarian grounds, then maybe they could just. . . stop being so inhumane to their own people? I mean, wouldn't removing the pretext remove even the hint of a threat?
On point 2, if you view NATO as being "anti-evil," maybe just. . . don't be evil?
On point three, when everyone to your west is "a hammer," maybe you're just a nail? The same groups that messed with Russia over the past 300 years tended to be attacking everyone else too. Napoleon invaded Russia, but also he invaded every other part of Europe. Hitler invaded Russia, but also he invaded every other part of Europe. Russia isn't special, bub, you're just the same as everyone else.
54
-
43
-
37
-
33
-
29
-
25
-
22
-
21
-
20
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
15
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Any country in which a country might choose to incorporate while not being the place where that company's executives live and work, is a tax haven. There is no reason why any business would be incorporated in a Swiss PO Box other than tax avoidance, so as long as that practice remains active, they are a tax haven. If they want to stop being a tax haven, then stop allowing that practice.
I personally think that the larger industrialized countries of the world should join together and sign up to a "tax fairness zone," in which a tax "minimum wage" is set up, with the rule being that if this minimum amount is set at, say, 30%, then ANY business that operates in ANY of these countries will be expected to pay a total of 30% tax to someone. If they just pay that 30% to their home country, then fine, burden covered. If, however, they set up in some tax haven with an 8% rate, and only pay 8%, then they will still owe 22% to someone, and will have to pay it off. That money needs to be passed into the hands of some government, a sort of "you don't have to go home, but you can't stay here" policy. If they're going to be offloading that money anyway, then it may as well go to the country they are physically established in anyway, rather than off to some tax haven.
4
-
@TheMajorpickle01 I can get why Turkey would want people to use the toll road, and I get why they would want to force a renegotiation on the treaty. My point though is that if the treaty says "you aren't allowed to mess with the natural waterways," then building a canal would not suddenly allow them to "mess with the waterways if you like." They should still be required to leave those natural waterways unobstructed and allow nature to takes its course.
Realistically, if the current average wait time is, say, ten hours, and they do build the canal, and some portion of the traffic decides to pay to use it, then that would actually reduce the traffic on the natural routes, reducing wait times even further, so they might go away completely, causing people to not use the toll lane, causing wait times to go up, etc. ;) But either way, they should never end up higher than they would be without the canal.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4