Youtube comments of Jeremy Barlow (@jeremybarlow2291).

  1. 747
  2. 550
  3. 382
  4. 309
  5. 309
  6. 156
  7. 124
  8. 123
  9. 110
  10. 93
  11. 86
  12. 84
  13. 75
  14. 71
  15. 65
  16. 64
  17. 63
  18. 59
  19. They are most definitely upset about digital nomads in Europe, Canada, and the USA extricating themselves from the Western tax base by for Europeans and Canadians, moving to Dubai & setting up a free zone company, and either living there for a year or living briefly in a country with rules that allow them to be tax resident in a low or no tax country while living there for 2 months or less. After you are no longer in the European or Canadian tax system, until you legally become resident there again, I do not presently see the UAE chasing you down to tax you while you continue a digital nomad lifestyle seeing the world. The US is upset that backpackers earning up to $120k a year or maybe a bit more if they utilize travel expenses appropriately and add the right income channels to their mix of strategies are escaping the US tax system to a large degree. They are far more upset that those people are using the tax savings to buy a Caribbean passport and renouncing their citizenship, but what they really hate is money is being spent by those "citizens" ie slaves, in other countries. What they really don't like now is that people because of YouTube are seeing people who grew up in their "first world countries" experiencing a better quality of life in poor "third world countries" with lower tax burdens, more to do, lower costs of living inspiring others to leave the rat race they created in their countries. I mean the "first world" already has a labor shortage because Westerners are telling people in the "third-world" the opportunities are better or at least as good in your home country as they are in the "wealthy" countries. Those same people are seeing those same videos in their country. They have labor shortages exacerbated by the fact that a person with a laptop and an Etsy store can make up the salary or wages from their low wage job selling trinkets and trash online while working 10 hours a week. They have the problem of many people ditching apartments and houses for life in a Van because minimalism and an unencumbered simpler life allows people to work less not only fueling a labor shortage, but also hurting the real estate investor market. But when people begin to decide to leave for greener pastures by deploying those minimalist strategies, they know they cannot allow travel to be as easy as it has been in recent years. It is very bad for their incumbent player advantages.
    58
  20. 51
  21. 49
  22. 44
  23. 44
  24. “We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.” JFK said that on Sept. 12, 1962. In February of the same year the USA had put John Glenn on a rocket and sent him orbiting around the earth 3 times. That was the first time we had successfully orbited the earth. Less than 7 years after Pres. Kennedy’s speech we landed two human beings on the surface of a foreign planet , the moon- for the first time in July 20, 1969. We did that not because it was necessary, but because we just decided to go. In October of 1939 Alexander Sachs met with President Roosevelt to discuss Einstein and Leo Szilard’s letter about that atomic bomb and the need to build one. No one has ever even refined uranium or causes a chain reaction controlled or otherwise with the material at that point anywhere on earth. It was theory. At that time most of Europe and Asia were already at war. Most people thought the US would be drawn into the conflict and many believed that Hitler was developing the weapon as Heisenberg the leading nuclear physicist on the planet was in Nazi Germany. While Heisenberg was working on a bomb the entirety of teams working on the bomb in Germany, Japan, and the Soviet Union included 11 human beings in total. The American physicists were correct about how powerful the weapon would be if it were created. What they hadn’t thought about was the consequences anyone who would have convinced Hitler or Stalin to invest in such a weapon and failed to deliver would have suffered. 120,000 people went to work on the bomb project in the US, Canada, and the United Kingdom and on July 16, 1945 the trinity test in Almagordo was a success. These projects were impossibilities. We didn’t know how to achieve them. We didn’t have the technical know how, merely the will to succeed and we achieved those goals in a matter of less than 6 years for the A-Bomb and 7 years for the moon landing. The bomb was arguably a necessity in the minds of the scientists building it because if the Nazi’s had built one first the world would have been decimated. The moon shot was just a whim. Anyone who thinks that we cannot achieve a goal we know how to meet technologically, we don’t need to create new tech- and do so in 12 years also missed the entirety of the New Deal era which in less than 12 years gave all of rural America electricity for example. We know how to go 100% green. We have the technology. We have the resources. We simply need the political and economic will to do it. We could easily accomplish this goal in 5 years if we decide to do it.
    40
  25. 39
  26. 36
  27. 34
  28. It's possible for a US person who has renounced US citizenship -preferably obtaining another citizenship first, if they hold a college degree, I would highly encourage a CBI in one of the OECS countries then using their membership in Caricom to obtain a skilled worker certificate to secure freedom of movement rights in Barbados, Belize, Trinidad & Tobogo and other Caricom countries. If that US person is a permanent resident of the US or a temporary worker under an H1B or similar visa, then by ending their residential connection with the US to use a US based LLC -preferably in one of the state corporate & income tax free states, Wyoming, Texas, Washington, Nevada for example, and have a tax free operation, if they live in the right country as a tax resident, and manage the company ie hold formal annual board meetings in the right country or countries. I suggest the Caricom citizenship because under the US-Barbados tax treaty, holding a board meeting for a US organized company in Barbados doesn't make a company tax resident in Barbados. As long as there are no employees or contractors in the US, legal precedent in the US does not make this pass through entity subject to US tax, necessarily. Under the US-USSR tax treaty which the US recognizes, but Georgia does not, the tax rate on even royalties from a US business to Georgia is a 0% withholding rate. A company not managed and controlled or organized in Georgia with no permanent establishments in Georgia is not subject to tax in Georgia under Georgian law currently. A high networth individual with $3 million in assets or over about $65k a year in income for the last three years who owns requisite property in Georgia and has a residency permit due to that property ownership can avail themselves of tax residency in Georgia by not being tax resident elsewhere and proving they have a high networth and maintain residency in Georgia. This would give a digital nomad the ability to move rather freely. The republic of Georgia does not tax individuals on offshore income. The US tax resident company per the US-Barbados treaty as a pass through entity under US law would only be taxable in Georgia under current US law if the pass through owner was tax resident in Georgia. In this instance, even royalty payments typically subject to a 30% withholding rate in the US would have a 0% withholding rate under the US-USSR treaty which the US recognizes and as the owner & not the company would be considered the owner of the royalties, even some of the most difficult income to extract from the US tax free could pass tax free to a Georgian resident through this US LLC. So long as a digital nomad in this scenario did not become tax resident elsewhere, by holding annual board meetings for the US LLC in Barbados, it would not be taxable in Barbados under the treaty or Georgia under Georgian law, but would be a foreign company as a US LLC. It would still have nonresident reporting requirements to the IRS, but should not be a taxable entity, and as long as the nomad does no work in Georgia, they should not be taxable on the company profits in Georgia either. The US LLC provides fairly easy access to good online transactional banking for an operating company and a Wyoming LLC provides strong asset protection both against liabilities of the company to the owner, and liabilities of the owner in regards to assets of the company with charging order protection. This means if the owner got into a car wreck in a country where that being their fault could be costly, it would be almost impossible for a judgement creditor whose claims exceeded the nomad's liability insurance to liquidate the LLCs assets. I bring this up, because it always makes me laugh that a US LLC is one of the best tax haven assets in the world for people who are not US citizens if they plan how to use it correctly. In terms of US citizens reducing taxes, a C or S Corp or a foreign corporation in a zero tax jursdiction where economic substance requirements are not an issue with proper use of foreign residence exclusion, foreign earned income exclusion, per diems, health insurance deductions, health savings accounts, IRAs and 401(k)s, along with travel expenses can get a US taxpayer north of $200k a year tax free. The combination of a US C or S Corp with the right zero tax foreign entity as a subsidiary using a check the box election can be useful -if you can get banking for that zero tax entity. The recent introduction of economic substance requirements in many zero or low tax jurisdictions to satisfy the OECD and avoid being blacklisted from participation in international bank clearing of transactions has made a lot of low or zero tax jurisdictions nearly impossible to use because bank accounts are hard to get, or economic substance requirements are costly to comply with in ways they did not used to be. There are exceptions, but if you want to be a nomad, then it is harder than ever before. The way around this is proper planning, structuring and use of the right entity types in countries that are not on any blacklists which are easier to secure banking for than headline rate zero tax countries.
    32
  29. 30
  30. 30
  31. 26
  32. 26
  33. 25
  34. 24
  35. 23
  36. 22
  37. 22
  38. 22
  39. 21
  40. 21
  41. 20
  42. 19
  43. 19
  44. 19
  45. 19
  46. 18
  47. 18
  48. 18
  49. 18
  50. 18
  51. 17
  52. 17
  53.  @thebigpicture2032  I need a car maybe 40 minutes a day if I'm the average commuter. If I'm the average retiree I need a car maybe 1 hour a week. If I'm self-employed and work from home -a growing segment of the population, again, maybe 1 hour a week I need a car. Which means if I'm the average commuter that in a year, I will need a car 200 hours out of 8,670 hours at the high end when you factor in special trips. If I'm not a big commuter, I will need a car maybe 60 to 70 hours per year out of that same 8,760 hours.again factoring in special trips. If you take a big road trip to visit family across the country or to see sights, maybe add 40 hours of trip time for the car usage. Now let's assume that the ride share companies with the reduced fleet costs of self-driving EVs and the reduced fuel costs of solar powered charging, and the reduced costs of no longer needing a driver can charge $0.60 per mile for their service and be profitable. That means if I'm a commuter and I'm not in a car sharing version of the service which car pooling would likely become more common in this scenario reducing costs to maybe $0.20 per mile for a daily commute, that means I can spend $4,800 per year to get back and forth to work at the high end, or $1,600.00 per year at the low end with car pooling. If I'm self-employed or retired, I can spend $1,440 per year at the high end with no car pooling -more likely in this scenario, and $480 at the low end with car pooling. To buy a car at the $35K range which is not super expensive these days, you are going to spend easily $7,500 to $8,000 per year just to pay for the vehicle or more if bought on credit. You are going to spend another $1,200 per year or more maybe less depending on the state and city of residence for insurance. Those are fixed costs for the commuter and the retiree or self-employed work from home person. You are also going to spend $0.04 per mile on electrical costs, or $0.10 per mile for gasoline costs on average so $320 for an EV or $800 for a gas car if you are a commuter. The self-employed work from home person or retiree will spend $96 for electricity for the EV or $240 for the gas car. What economically rational actor will buy a car in that economic reality, especially when wages are falling or stagnant for most people? Now with the number of people living in vans, on your other point, I would say you are onto something, but people will fall into one of two camps. They will either be van dwellers who save on having the expenses of a house, or they will be house dwellers or apartment dwellers who save on the expenses of having a car. Oh, and one more thing, in many cities, the cost of parking a car makes this equation even more of a no brainer for the apartment or house dweller.
    17
  54. 17
  55. 17
  56. 16
  57. 16
  58. 16
  59. 16
  60. 15
  61. 15
  62. 14
  63. 14
  64. Antigua is the CBI passport I would look at first in terms of bang for the buck. I would think about North Macedonia before Turkey because while I doubt it will ultimately join the EU, it might, but it gives you Japan. You don't get Thailand, but a Thai Elite Visa or a Thai Investor visa can take care of that. Would Turkey give you a few more countries visa free, sure, but are they countries likely to be at the top of your list of places to visit? Aside from Thailand which is not that difficult to obtain a visa for, not really. Kazakhstan? Mongolia? If you have the money to buy a CBI, you have the money and income to go to a Mexican consulate and get a Permanent Residency Permit for Mexico for your Antigua or North Macedonia passport which would put Mexico back on your list. Now after that, Bulgaria or Portugal become appealing for getting an EU citizenship, but you need to structure your investments correctly if you are going to become tax resident in either one. They are mostly appealing for non-EU citizens. If you are already an EU citizen, having a backup citizenship like any of the Caribbean citizenships is probably a good idea in the event they ever adopt a US style citizenship based tax regime. If you are single, then spending vacation time in any of the EU countries that offer citizenship to spouses of their citizens after a set amount of time, regardless of the location of your residence becomes appealing because your spouse potentially gives you the ability to live and work anywhere in the EU which can be helpful for structuring transactions.
    14
  65. 14
  66. 14
  67. 13
  68. 13
  69. Bank accounts are the tip of the iceberg. There are also permanent establishment issues, the new economic substance test regimes, the clout to avoid banking issues or not, and the ability to benefit from double tax treaties. Where are your personnel working from is a vital question thanks to the new economic substance tests. Where is the IBC registered to operate is another question. I mean yes you are BVI corporation, but are you only authorized to do business in the BVI, or have you registered as a foreign corporation elsewhere? You haven't? Where are your personnel in the BVI, how many of them are there? Where is your managing director located? Who is that person? What ownership stake do they hold in the company? Do they have checkbook authority or are they merely a nominee director ie are they a sham? Most of the jurisdictions which had IBCs excluding the truly territorial tax jurisdictions, ie Panama, Hong Kong and the like will tax the worldwide profits if the business is actually operating in their jurisdiction, and if you aren't, well where are you registered to do business otherwise? It takes a lot of planning of various parts to avoid taxes as a multinational corporation which is what you personally must become to avoid taxes. Find a video explaining the Double Irish with a Dutch Sandwich or the Double Irish with a Single Malt to begin understanding the kind of thinking that is actually involved. If you are an American add to that complexity GILTI and Subpart F, but also add to it foreign tax credits, FBAR, FATCA, and the foreign earned income exclusion. If you are in the EU -not the UK, Brexit was clearly about their overseas tax havens, but the rest of the EU, get ready for something like the US worldwide tax regime to take effect soon, and understand there are a lot of moving parts to consider. You have to think like a multinational corporation's tax attorneys and tax consulting accountants. You need to be reading KPMG, Deloitte, and PWC reports on various countries corporate and personal income tax regimes. You need to understand how to obtain residency in favorable tax jurisdictions. You need to figure out which countries have favorable double tax treaties with the country where you situate you primary business, and which countries have regimes that will allow you to have subsidiaries with favorable transfer pricing studies to hire employees at the lowest wages and get the best performance while paying the least tax on the profits those companies must show for the services they provide to the primary company. You must figure out which country has the economic might to avoid issues with the EU blacklist. You need to figure out how to get money out of major markets with withholding regimes like the 30% tax the USA imposes on most transfers of money out of the country, except to jurisdictions who benefit from favorable double tax treaties and you must probably find such countries which have favorable double tax treaties with your primary country for your business because they likely aren't the same country. You also need to figure out how to get proper transfer pricing studies done to make sure that the countries in question do not take issue with transfers out of their country of the profits those subsidiaries earned without taxes inside those nations being imposed. You are going to need to understand IP licensing, loans and interest payments for this, or you are going to need to find low tax jurisdictions for this to work. There are a million moving parts to international tax planning, and that is what Andrew is trying to say, without saying it. You can figure this all out on your own if you are a lawyer or an accountant working at an international tax planning consultancy. If you aren't and you have the 120 IQ needed by most to complete graduate school, you can probably figure it out too, but it will take a lot of reading and research. It will probably take hiring translations for various treaties and statutes as well because there will be a lot of languages that laws and treaties you need to worry about are written in that you probably won't be able to read. Hell there may even be treaties in effect as far as one country is concerned that another country disregards that would be a huge advantage to you which you will need to figure out how to use regardless.
    13
  70. "Nothing will fundamentally change." -Joe Biden to a room full of well to do contributors. So far the leadership in Congress and his own actions have shown his policies & their policies do not differ significantly from those of the Trump Administration. This to me means that the destabilizing effect on democracy that the previous administration had on the United States is likely to worsen. The US has been a flawed democracy for quite some time & the failure of leadership & vision inside the United States to address the challenges facing the nation due to crony capitalism's consolidation of power & anti-competitiveness, the failure to alleviate pressures stemming from income inequality by implementing policies that will alleviate overly burdensome healthcare expenses on American business while providing better coverage for all Americans by implementing sensible employment taxes & regulation in place of the current private insurance scheme that is creating a disunity in the populace is hurting the country. What I find interesting is that a country like Singapore, and a country like Uruguay have been able to implement a fairly low territorial tax system, while also creating systems of universal healthcare & creating an environment that has not priced most of their citizens out of the housing market either as buyers or as consumers of quality housing, yet the United States is failing in this mission with far more land, far more resources, and a highly productive people. The reality it occurs to me is that no political leader in America has said, we can have a tax system that provides better for the basic social welfare needs of it's citizens AND costs less for both workers & business owners than our current system. Not one political leader in the United States has said, we can provide a system of universal healthcare and have low taxes. Singapore does this with very little government spending and has some of the best healthcare in the world with a system that is universal. Uruguay's healthcare is not the enviable system that Singapore has, it isn't even as solid as it's slightly poorer South American neighbor Chile, nor fellow Latin American territorial taxed neighbor Costa Rica whose universal healthcare system, like Chile's places it ahead of the USA. Why am I mentioning healthcare so prominently as an issue that is causing the problems in the US? Because it is THE issue which to a large degree stifles enterprenuership in the USA. It is also one of the two leading issues that creates significant income inequality, this despite the fact that the current system which not only leaves too many people without care, costs American business FAR MORE than all of their competitors around the world. Can the USA adopt the Singaporean healthcare system entirely today? No, it really can't because of how the current system is designed, but it can redesign the current system to transition towards a Singaporean style system over the course of two generations. It will easily take forty years to make health savings accounts the major source of payments rather than insurers, be they private or public, but it can be done. Hell the US could adopt an entirely territorial tax system & it would probably increase revenue returns to the treasury so long as the destabilizing pressures of the poorly managed healthcare system were addressed. Are there other issues in regards to crony capitalism that need to be dealt with to get the US on the right track, yes, but no one in either of the two main parties in the US are in any way prepared to address them because the political leadership of the country in both parties is owned by a myopic group of kleptocratic crony capitalists who are blind to the risks the failure of the US as a democracy will have on their consumer base & long term business interests.
    13
  71. 13
  72. 13
  73. 13
  74. 13
  75. 13
  76. 12
  77. 12
  78. 12
  79. 12
  80. 12
  81. 12
  82. 12
  83. 11
  84. 11
  85. 11
  86. 11
  87. 11
  88. 11
  89. 11
  90. 11
  91. 10
  92. 10
  93. 10
  94. My plan is to get a business that earns most of its income through royalties functional, move to Portugal on a D7 visa and residence and earn an EU citizenship while benefiting from the NHR and Social Security Totalization Agreement as an American self-employed in Portugal. A royalty based business has few litigation risks, and most litigation risks that could apply would not be protected by a corporate liability shield regardless, so it is a practical way to operate in terms of tax efficiency and asset protection. After gaining Portuguese citizenship, the options for how to operate and where to live become a lot easier to deal with, especially as it opens up multiple EU jurisdictions for corporate structures and tax planning because as an EU citizen I could work as a board member in any EU country. Ireland, Hungary, and Cyprus offer some solid structuring strategies. The potential tax savings while living in Portugal may also allow enough savings to purchase a Caribbean citizenship, assuming the programs remain open. Dominica's current visa-free access is probably the most appealing as a supplement and compliment to Portugal. Securing a Skilled Worker Certification for Caricom would be part of the strategy when obtaining any Caribbean citizenship. After obtaining Portuguese citizenship, a residence permit in Mexico, Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines, Uruguay, Costa Rica, Barbados, or Georgia would all be likely possibilities. Cyprus, Ireland, and Malta might also be in the mix for residency.
    10
  95. 10
  96. 10
  97. 10
  98. 10
  99. 10
  100. 10
  101. 9
  102. 9
  103. 9
  104. 9
  105. 9
  106. 9
  107. 9
  108. 9
  109. 9
  110. 9
  111. 8
  112. 8
  113. 8
  114. 8
  115. 8
  116. 8
  117. 8
  118. 8
  119. 8
  120. 8
  121. IronskullGM 37 of the 56 founders of this country were lawyers. 55 of the 56 owned slaves. Every single one of them was rich. Hancock was the wealthiest man in the Americas BEFORE THE REVOLUTION. George Washington was the wealthiest man in America after the revolution. The only people they allowed to vote were men with property. They didn’t get to vote for the Senate or the President. They have never allowed anyone to vote for judges. Literally this government was designed for elitists, by elitists. Having knowledge doesn’t necessarily make someone an elitist. It allows them to understand complexity. Perspective makes someone an elitist. Wealth and seeking control makes someone an elitist. Ralph Nader is an educated man. He lives in the house his parents who owned a small grocery store that they started left him. The million dollars he won in a lawsuit for defamation against GM was all donated to a not-for profit. No one who has ever met the man would call him an elitist. Educated and intelligent yes, but not an elitist. He isn’t part of the ruling class. He is part of the working class, from the petit bourgeois certainly, but not from the ruling capitalist class. Despite an Ivy League education few would call George W. Bush intelligent, but he comes from old money on both sides of his family. He is from the ruling capitalist class. His mother was a relative of President Pierce. His father’s father was a business partners of the son of the owner of the Union Pacific railroad. Despite a false humility he is the definition of an elitist because he went to schools for rulers and he has a family fortune which he will pass on to his children. He owned an MLB team for Christ sake. Most people would call Jack Kennedy an elitist too for the same reason - he came from a wealthly capitalist family and went to the private schools that train rulers. Elitism is about wealth and the perspective of a ruling class. Knowledge doesn’t create an elite -wealth and privileges that come with that wealth make someone elite.
    8
  122. 8
  123. The one big benefit Turkey offers with it's passport is their excellent consular protection as compared with many countries. If your Turkish passport was lost in just about any country that Turkey gives you visa free, visa on arrival, of e-visa access to, it is a safe bet you could walk into a Turkish consulate and obtain assistance getting a replacement passport. The Caricom countries that offer CBI are personally lacking in terms of consular protection, but as member states of the British Commonwealth, the UKs extensive consular protection network offers similar benefits to the Turkish embassies and consulates around the world. Interestingly enough, the UK Commonwealth's extensive network of embassies is often useful for Canadians, Australians, and New Zealand because while the CNA countries of CUNA like the US are quite selective about who they allow to visit or reside in their territories, their embassy networks are no where near as extensive as the US or the leading European powers of the UK, France, or Germany. While it is unlikely anyone would obtain citizenship by naturalization in Singapore or Malaysia, it is good to know that the extensive network or diplomatic missions those nations which do not allow dual citizenship are backstopped by the UK's nearly universal network of diplomatic missions as member states of the British Commonwealth. Like the US, the UK's network of consulates has a few minor gaps in countries that are not likely to be high on anyone's list of places to visit, but there are some gaps, but Turkey has an embassy in most of those countries. A lot of Latin American countries where you may obtain citizenship through naturalization fairly quickly have good consular protection, but not as extensive as Turkey or the British Commonwealth provides, nor as good as the US consular protection coverage generally although the US leaves something to be desired in a few places you might suspect, but they are countries where travel on an American passport would likely be a poor decision. Citizenship in an EU country typically provides not only an excellent travel document, but also consular protection not only from your country of citizenship, but also every other EU country in the event your home country does not have a consulate in a particular country. This means that France or Germany will likely be able to provide assistance if your home country cannot. I believe the consular protection considerations are something people should consider when obtaining a second citizenship, but also, something to consider when planning to obtain a portfolio of passports.
    8
  124. 8
  125. 8
  126. 8
  127. 8
  128. 8
  129. 8
  130. 8
  131. 8
  132.  @Goodtimes4100  anyone waiting for a bottom is going to be disappointed, because it will not come. The average landlord can cut rents enough to keep their properties competitive and the people who are out of work for the most part are renters. Do you think the average Walmart worker owns their home? What percentage of those who do are married to someone else who is the primary breadwinner who is in an essential job or one that easily became work from home. Remember the Walmart worker still has a job, so does the McDonald's worker. What percentage of people working at Hot Topic lost their job? What percentage of those people owned a home? All of them lost their job, maybe one in 10k owned a home and they were the trophy bride of some middle aged lawyer who is still working as a DA. Who is still working? Homeowners. Who is out of work? Service workers at amusements and sit down restaurants, the cleaning staff at office buildings. There are maybe a million small business owners who were forced to close for good and those are the sellers in this market and a bunch of them will be renting their house before they go broke and moving in with their adult kids who are employed or their elderly parents to regroup. Some of them will move into a van while renting their house out. Some of them will keep their house as rental and take a crap job to pay rent somewhere else. There are a handful of mom and pop landlords who are overextended and there is mountain of REIT money waiting to buy them out. The people with a job who own a home, which is more likely than not 98% of homeowners are not seller's anymore. The homeowners who aren't working are on social security and this hasn't phased them at all. Their houses are off the market. Anyone who thinks this market is going down is wrong. There will be a market contraction. There will be less properties on the market. Market rents will go down, but sale prices are not going anywhere there is too much cash and credit is too easy for major players to consolidate against mom and pop landlords. Homeowners are not sellers in this market because it will be impossible to get top dollar, so market contraction is coming.
    8
  133. 8
  134. 7
  135. 7
  136. 7
  137. 7
  138. 7
  139. 7
  140. 7
  141. 7
  142. 7
  143. 7
  144. 7
  145. 7
  146. 7
  147. 7
  148. 7
  149. 7
  150. 7
  151. If you can work anywhere & earn that amount, move to a territorial or zero tax country where you can get residence. If you work for someone else, make sure it doesn't make them tax liable where you live. If necessary pay taxes where you are at & with savings from the Foreign Earned Income Exemption save to buy a CBI, or move to a country where you will obtain citizenship & a second passport. You may even consider moving to an EU country where you can obtain citizenship even if you must pay the tax. Once you have a second citizenship, your options become more open. If you are working for yourself and earning that and can work anywhere, get yourself to a tax free country like the UAE, you probably can't afford the pricier zero tax countries yet. The first plan of attack should be figuring out how to get a second citizenship. If you have access to a citizenship by descent somewhere do the work and get that citizenship. If you cannot, then figure out how good your passport must be. Do you want a Tier A or is Tier B+ or A- good enough? Is Tier C good enough? If you want to live in the Philippines long term getting a passport from even Ecuador with no access to Europe might be good enough for you. If you will never get wealthy, Argentina might be fine, because they have talked about a global wealth tax on citizens regardless of where they live and you cannot renounce Argentine citizenship. If you want to move to a zero tax country eventually, Portugal may not be the place because of their five year tax rule when you move to a blacklist country. They will say you are a Portuguese resident regardless of physical or family ties remaining in Portugal. Luxembourg will tax you a lot while you are there, but won't chase you when you leave. Sweden will chase you. Mexico consider you a resident as a citizen even after you leave if you have a home there. You have to examine the quirks and figure out what citizenships suit you best. the reason St Kitts is so popular as a CBI is because they don't tax you even if you live there, but may tax your company under the current rules if it is managed there. I recommend reading PWC's reports on countries to figure out the broad tax rules there or Deloitte's highlights and looking at naturalization and residency rules for countries. You should of course examine the visa requirements for citizens of the countries you might want to obtain citizenship from and understand they change. The US now needs a visa to visit Bolivia a few months ago that was not the case. Once you have it narrowed down, examine the short list more closely by talking with immigration and tax attorneys in those countries. Many will be able to meet with you by something like Zoom, many will not, but a phone call is possible. You need to get practical advice from professionals in the jurisdiction. You will also want to speak with a US tax lawyer who is versed in international tax planning and a similar US accountant especially if you have a US based business. The 2017 tax reforms made moving existing US IP assets most businesses have offshore, more difficult in terms of tax planning for example.
    7
  152. 7
  153. 7
  154. 7
  155. 7
  156. 7
  157. 7
  158. 7
  159. 7
  160. Whether or not you are tax resident somewhere outside the US really depends on the rules of each locality. I mean Spain is going to do everything to say you are resident there. Thailand may not consider you a tax resident even if you have lived there two years on say the Thai elite visa. You have to examine the tax residency rules of each locality and structure your lifestyle, business and assets to ensure you aren't tax resident in multiple places, preferably for Americans structured in a way where you aren't tax resident anywhere else, or if you are tax resident somewhere else, it is in a country with a double tax treaty with the US that allows you to structure your affairs to avoid US taxes, and minimize the local taxes too. The US has a lot of DTAs and several Social Security Totalization Agreements that can prove helpful. The country where you decide to become tax resident in such a scenario would be one that it would be most beneficial to have its own Double Tax Agreements with the other countries you intend to spend time in, especially ones that make it clear qualifying for residency in your first choice excludes you from residency in the other place or places. I mean the general rule would be a short term rental in a place like an AirBNB for 3 months is less likely to make you tax resident than a year long lease you only live at for 3 months, while a place you own and live at for 1 month a year is more likely to make you tax resident than the rental, or at least maintain a tax residency. There are a lot of broad strokes that vary by country and general rules always have exceptions. I means for Americans the other thing to think about is are you still tax domiciled in the state you lived in before you left. You may be unless you properly severe ties and establish a nona fide residency somewhere else. In some instances it may even make sense to move to an income tax free state particularly one like South Dakota that allows you to obtain a driver's license with a one night hotel stay as proof of residency and a mail forwarder before leaving to severe ties with a state that will continue to tax you like New York or California. You may also need to get rid of storage units, and property ties like a vehicle titled in those states because they want to keep taking a pound of flesh as long as they can. Exiting the US correctly is phase one. Using the foreign earned income exclusion and foreign housing exemption and foreign tax credits is step 2 of dealing with exiting the US. Not becoming tax resident in the wrong jurisdiction is step 3, becoming tax resident in the right jurisdiction if you must is step 4. I've looked at the broad stroke tax guides published by Deloitte and Price Waterhouse Coopers for easily 50 or 60 countries to winnow it down to a handful of countries I would even think about becoming tax resident in and amongst those you still have to decide what the tradeoffs are and if the tradeoffs are worthwhile. I mean the Bahamas, Turks & Caicos, Cayman Islands, and the UAE all have great tax rates at 0% for the most part, but a) do you have the capital to move to them, b) do you want to live full time on a island or in the desert, c) if you can afford one and want to live there can it help you get citizenship in a reasonable period of time if you want or need an alternative passport? Then you look at a place like Argentina, the tax rate is terrible, it is difficult to exit it's tax net. It has a wealth tax too, but you can get citizenship there in a handful of years potentially and it is relatively inexpensive with a world class city in Buenos Aires and a multitude of climates in the country. You look at a place like Belize, and it has a mediocre passport for the most part, a tax system that can be very favorable to you, but you wouldn't want to bank there and the Cayes seem relatively safe with the Caribbean beach lifestyle as does Placencia. It takes a fairly long time to get the passport at over 6 years, but it is a relatively easy place to immigrate to, and so are some other places. You can move to Thailand or the Philippines relatively easily, but you are unlikely to ever get citizenship in either country and if you do, they are not great passports and dual citizenship is a no go for naturalized Filipinos. If you structure your affairs correctly you are unlikely to be liable for tax in either country even if you are there almost all year. It's not impossible to become tax resident in either country, but taxes can be avoided even as a resident with proper structuring. Mexico has a great passport, it's relatively easy to move there if you have some location independent income, you can naturalize in about 6 years or so, but taxes are extremely high in Mexico and even with a double tax treaty with the US it has a lot of tax risk for a US citizen who becomes resident there and leaving can be hard with its own exit taxes. Portugal has the NHR which can be beneficial for taxes, but you have to structure your affairs very precisely to benefit from it and you may have exit taxes to pay when you leave on capital gains. It has a fantastic passport which you can get in six or so years of living there, but you have to structure things just right not to get hit with high tax bills if you become tax resident there. If you can afford the golden visa investment you can be resident for the purpose of pursing the citizenship and may not become tax resident, but I think that to obtain the citizenship will involve spending more time there than the minimum to maintain the golden visa, but maybe less than the 183 days in 12 months to become tax resident, but you still might be found to have Portugal as your center of interest, and if that happened on the second year you were there, no NHR for you and really high Portuguese taxes. All of this is to say the risk reward ratio. Has to be examined for anywhere you are considering and you need to know what does and does not make you tax resident. You also need to know the incentive options available to immigrants if any. You need to figure out it you want to pursue s citizenship by naturalization and residency anywhere or save up and obtain a citizenship by investment. I mean Dubai is an expensive place to live, but it offers a pretty great tax benefit if you can afford to become tax resident there and can structure a company properly. If you structure trips to other places during the hottest parts of it's year, you can avoid the heat and maintain a tax residency there and with the tax savings maybe buy a CBI. Figuring out what place interest you, what the tax rules for each place are and how to avoid residency where you don't want to be resident, or become resident in a favorable jurisdiction if you want that is about doing the research. PWC and Deloitte have good resources online to start researching the taxes. Wikipedia does a good job of telling you what countries have what visa free access where to help you figure out where it might be a good place to get a second passport. The next step after that is a lot more google searching and talking with local lawyers and accountants in the countries you are interested in. This is not a one size fits anyone process.
    7
  161. 7
  162. Have you ever discussed the importance of examining the availability of diplomatic missions & consular assistance when considering gaining residence or making an investment with an eye towards citizenship either through residency or investment? Also the importance of membership in the British Commonwealth for the Caribbean & Vanuatu CBI programs regarding this issue in particular. Also the importance of the consular assistance agreements amongst EU members for their citizens in countries where they themselves don't have a diplomatic mission. I know Mercusor has adopted a similar freedom of movement regime to the EU, but has Mercusor also adopted a similar consular assistance agreement? The issue came into acute focus for me recently when a few American YouTubers in different countries lost their passport. One merely misplaced it on a plane, the other was robbed at gunpoint and lost it in the robbery. One was in Mexico, the other was in Syria and both needed to replace their passports to exit the countries and continue with their travels. While none of the Caribbean CBI countries have extensive diplomatic missions, all benefit from membership in the Commonwealth and the consular assistance the UK can provide to citizens of Commonwealth countries in conjunction with their country of citizenship, in particular the UK's extensive network of diplomatic missions, but it was almost painful to think about what would happen to an Argentinian citizen who lost their passport in Mongolia or another far flung nation where that country had no consulates or embassy. It's particularly troubling when you notice the visa free access of some smaller countries with no consulates in several nations they have visa free access to for their citizens.
    7
  163. 7
  164. 7
  165. 6
  166. 6
  167. 6
  168. 6
  169. 6
  170. 6
  171. 6
  172. 6
  173. 6
  174. 6
  175. 6
  176. 6
  177. 6
  178. 6
  179. 6
  180. 6
  181. 6
  182. 6
  183. What do you think about Orbital Rings? I mean there is no unobtainium problem. We can make Kevlar tethers that could withstand a 300 mile or so climb to the low earth orbit design that is most feasible. We know how to create the copper wires that would create the magnetic fields the exostructure would float on. Don’t get me wrong massive engineering feats would be required and a whole lot of math, but no unobtainium issue. Terrorist target galore too with the added drawback of 1G for anyone working or living on the ring, but with the vacuum of space and access to unfettered solar power, magnetic assist launches for deep space exploration and its usefulness as a platform for orbital construction projects would be considerable. From what I’ve seen the price tag to build a ring if done properly could be under a Trillion Hell if mass drivers were used to launch robotic asteroid mining kits and most of the construction materials were mined in space and refined on say the moon and a mass driver launched finished goods from the Moon we could probably build it for under $500 billion. Some estimates suggest that initial construction that ultimately bootstraps a complete ring could be done for under $50 billion. It doesn’t seem likely given the costs of the ISS, but there were studies funded in the early 1980s. A ring would reduce costs to $0.05 per pound according to some estimates in terms of getting goods to orbit. But what it would be really good for would be getting people into orbit. Mass drivers seem like a cheaper way to get materials aloft. People can’t handle the G forces you need to worry about with mass drivers.
    6
  184. 6
  185. 6
  186. 6
  187. 6
  188. 6
  189. 6
  190. 6
  191. 6
  192. I mean if you have a residence in a tax friendly place with solid banking like the Channel Islands or UAE or Switzerland and you have ties with a country such as a permanent home -that is in fact a vacation home as opposed to your true habitual abode, a d that higher tax country has a double tax treaty with the residence you want to be your primary tax home it may well make sense to have your banking in that primary tax home. You will want to have your banking there, your driver's license there, your doctor there, you will want your children if you have any enrolled in a school there, you will want to make it clear under most treaties that where you have a residence is your center of vital economic interest and your primary banking account that you pay bills from, perhaps not all of your money, but your operational accounts for you personal life at the very least ie a current account that pays your living expenses should be there especially if you are for example a citizen of the country where you have a primary residence. The tie breaker rules in Malta's Double Tax Treaties with those three even more tax friendly places will not resort to where you are a national to decide your tax residence if your center of interest is clearly in the other jurisdiction. If that jurisdiction is a solid banking jurisdiction as Switzerland, Jersey and Guernsey or the Isle of Man, and the UAE are, then baking there makes a lot of sense to secure tie breaker benefits under a tax treaty. You don't want Malta to consider you ordinary resident and domiciled there when you could have your money taxed at a zero rate in UAE or a lump sum regime at a favorable rate in Switzerland or even a capped rate in the Channel Islands that is similar to the Swiss lump sum regime.
    6
  193. 6
  194. 6
  195. 6
  196. 6
  197. 6
  198. 6
  199. 6
  200. 6
  201. 6
  202. 6
  203. 6
  204. 6
  205. 5
  206. 5
  207. 5
  208. 5
  209. 5
  210. 5
  211. 5
  212. 5
  213. 5
  214. 5
  215. 5
  216. 5
  217. 5
  218. 5
  219. 5
  220. 5
  221. 5
  222. 5
  223. 5
  224. 5
  225. 5
  226. 5
  227. 5
  228. 5
  229. 5
  230. 5
  231. 5
  232. 5
  233. 5
  234. 5
  235. 5
  236. 5
  237. 5
  238. 5
  239. If you are subject to the exit tax and likely even if you are not, your 401(k), or IRA will be taxed upon renunciation as if you cashed it all out in the date of expatriation. If it is a Roth & you are over 59 and 1/2 and have held it for five years, zero tax. If it is a traditional IRA or 401(k) it will generally be taxed as it would have been, including penalties if held less than five years or under age 59 and 1/2. If you qualified for social security so long as you are not living in one of a handful of countries that it cannot be paid to, you will collect it and it will be taxed in accordance with any double tax treaty or at the FDAP rate of 30%. If you have a pension from a private company, the same rules generally apply. Of course there are variables, and individual advice is better than someone explaining the general rules, but as I understand those are the general rules and this is not legal advice. Once you cash out the IRA or 401(k) you could invest in in a brokerage account elsewhere and that country's capital gains rules will apply and if invested in the US FDAP income ie dividends and interest will be taxed at double tax treaty rates or the standard FDAP rate of 30%. Of course Irish UCITS ETFs are a good way to get around that if you have a European brokerage account and are in a country where the 30% rate would apply, FOLLOWING EXPATRIATION. If you are still a US citizen UCITS are a bad idea because they a Passive Foreign Investment Corporations to the IRS, even if they are not strictly speaking Corporations which have penalties.
    5
  240. 5
  241. 5
  242. 5
  243. 5
  244. 5
  245. 5
  246. 5
  247. 5
  248. 5
  249. 5
  250. 5
  251. 5
  252. 5
  253. 5
  254. 5
  255. 5
  256. 5
  257. 5
  258. 5
  259. 5
  260. 4
  261. 4
  262. 4
  263. 4
  264. 4
  265. 4
  266. 4
  267. 4
  268. 4
  269. 4
  270. 4
  271. 4
  272. 4
  273. 4
  274. 4
  275. 4
  276. 4
  277. 4
  278. 4
  279. 4
  280. 4
  281. 4
  282. 4
  283. 4
  284. 4
  285. 4
  286. 4
  287. 4
  288. 4
  289. 4
  290. 4
  291. 4
  292. 4
  293. 4
  294. 4
  295. 4
  296. 4
  297. 4
  298. 4
  299. 4
  300. 4
  301. 4
  302. 4
  303. 4
  304. 4
  305. 4
  306. 4
  307. 4
  308. 4
  309. 4
  310. 4
  311. 4
  312. 4
  313. 4
  314. 4
  315. 4
  316. 4
  317. 4
  318. 4
  319. 4
  320. 4
  321. 4
  322. 4
  323. 4
  324. 4
  325. 4
  326. 4
  327. 4
  328. 4
  329. 4
  330. 4
  331. 4
  332. 4
  333. 4
  334. 4
  335. 4
  336. 4
  337. If you aren't thinking about a plan like the legal & accounting department at a large multi-national corporation, you are probably doing it wrong. I mean you need to worry (from an American perspective) about IP issues regarding transfers of any IP assets to a foreign company under the new rules surrounding GILTI which are designed to make it hard to expatriate a trademark, patent, copyright, or goodwill of a business. You have to look at the impacts of the offshore jurisdiction where the company is headquartered on GILTI liability now and give years from now when the rates become more punitive. You have to examine merchant account processors that will work with a given jurisdiction. You have to examine banks for the jurisdiction where the company is headquartered. You need to look at international double tax treaties with your primary market to see what jurisdictions can benefit you and how to possibly use multiple jurisdictions to get money out of a primary market without withholding and to your headquarters without a withholding from the jurisdiction you use to get money out of your primary market. You need to examine relationships potentially amongst multiple countries to make sure you can access markets other than the jurisdiction for your primary market. I say this because in this day and age most people going offshore I would assume have a business which is somewhat location independent thanks to the Internet. You need to examine payroll taxes in those various countries and local labor costs. You need to examine transfer pricing rules and controlled foreign corporation rules for jurisdictions where you may actually live, or with the trifecta approach you suggest you may need to make sure you can move between location a) b) or c) in a given time frame to avoid triggering tax residence in an undesirable location for you personally, or plan around that ever becoming an issue. Figuring out how to get company accounts is important, but so to are personal accounts for the places you want to live, which likely means residence permits are an issue too. I mean if you want to go to one jurisdiction and live in that jurisdiction and bank in that jurisdiction it may be easier, but if you want your company in one jurisdiction and you in other jurisdictions it becomes harder. If you want those two things and access to a specific target market without withholding issues regarding your customers from a given jurisdiction it is something else entirely. I mean if your target market is the US for your app or your SaaS and you want to get money out of the US without withholding taxes, that is going to take a lot of planning and probably multiple jurisdictions. You are going to be reading double tax treaties and local laws. You are also going to be looking at payment processors like a Stripe or a PayPal for jurisdictions that they freely work with and you will be looking at merchant account providers likely including high risk merchant account companies. On top of those logistics challenges you will also be looking for banks that will take your business in the approriate jurisdictions and nothing about any of this should ever seem cookie cutter to anyone. There may be solutions that are cookie cutter for certain scenarios, but a solution for a SaaS company is not going to look like a solution for an FBA company or a company that is manufacturing physical products where navigating tariffs may also become a significant issue beyond labor costs and tax implications. Let's not even get into transfer pricing and using a wholesaler to warehouse to export from the point of manufacturer take profits and resell to the import market.
    4
  338. 4
  339. 4
  340. 4
  341. 4
  342. 4
  343. 4
  344. 4
  345. 4
  346. 3
  347. 3
  348. 3
  349. 3
  350. 3
  351. 3
  352. 3
  353. A freshman congresswoman forced the Republican Controlled Senate to have a vote on a Green New Deal and has Republican Senators from Tennessee suggesting we need a “Manhattan Project” on clean energy to get us there in five years. A Republican Senator from Tennessee. Let me say that one more time. A Republican Senator from Tennessee is willing to put a “Manhattan Project” in the table for a five year plan to get us clean energy. The Manhattan Project cost $100 Billion adjusted for inflation 20 years ago so $300 billion today and employed 120,000 people to build a bomb on 4 years. If we put 120,000 people to work building rockets to deploy an orbital ring and solar farm satellites to beam power back down to earth and spent $300 billion on the project we would eliminate the need for fossil fuels in the US and the project would pay for itself in 3 to 6 years through the resale of that new electricity source. If we invested the same efforts into commercializing fusion reactors we could make that project a reality on 3 to 5 years too. But a freshman member of the House got that type of action on the table in the Senate. Tell me again what a Bernie Sanders Presidency couldn’t!5 do! Elected officials can only say no if everyone is saying no. The second that it becomes obvious they can be replaced and that if you replace them with even one real representative they all start to fall in line. You elect someone President with a citizen focused agenda they ask how high when the President tells them to jump!
    3
  354. 3
  355. 3
  356. 3
  357. 3
  358. 3
  359. 3
  360. 3
  361. 3
  362. 3
  363. 3
  364. 3
  365. 3
  366. 3
  367. 3
  368.  @anonymousanonymous6735  Residents of British Overseas Territories who naturalize as BOT Citizens often at the discretion of the Home Office in the UK are also naturalized as British Citizens, the majority of the time if you are naturalized as a BOTC you should also obtain UK citizenship as I understand it, but technically that is discretionary to the home office. Having said that, if you were not going to be granted UK citizenship, I suspect you also would be denied BOT citizenship. You technically "register" as a UK citizen after obtaining the BOT citizenship. It is a fairly wonky and bureaucratic process. Native born BOT Citizens & those who were BOT Citizens on the date the law went into effect granting British Citizenship to all BOT Citizens were made citizens of the UK proper automatically. There are lots of ways to become a UK citizen, but BOT Citizenship does not necessarily convey permanent residency or "belonger" status rights to a particular British Overseas Territory. Some BOTs do grant all rights of "belonger" status to BOT naturalized citizens, others require as much as 20 years of residency on the island to obtain "belonger" status and depending on the territory - in most you can obtain BOT citizenship with 5 years of residency just like 5 years living in the UK will provide UK citizenship so long as you have went through the process of obtaining "permanent leave to remain." The UK citizenship & residency laws and the BOT Citizenship rules confused the hell out of me and I say that as a lawyer who spent forever reading the rules. Oh and UK proper citizenship does not in any way so far as I can tell grant any residency rights to a British Overseas Territory. The internal immigration rules of the territory provide for that.
    3
  369. 3
  370. 3
  371. 3
  372. 3
  373. 3
  374. The fact that the ACT 20 company MUST provide services for EXPORT should not be lost in the HYPE. This is especially true in light of new Treasury Regulations which are beginning to source the income of digital sales at the point of consumption. AT LEAST for downloadable digital content, ie non-SaaS software and/or eBooks, or downloadable videos. This could dramatically hamper the potential tax benefits of the ACT 20 NOW ACT 60 loophole. Let's be honest it is a loophole and Congress is very good at plugging loopholes. What about this plug for the hole, they grant Puerto Rico statehood and it loses its tax advantaged status. Don't get me wrong, Puerto Rico looks good, in fact, today, with the rise of CRS and FATCA, the EU blacklist and the OECD forcing its economic substance requirements on the tax favorable jurisdictions of the past, there is a lot to be said for ACT 20 and ACT 22, now ACT 60 as I understand it, but it is likely to be a short term solution. In fact, by law, IT MUST BE A SHORT TERM SOLUTION, 30 years maximum if the 10 year renewal is granted at the 20 year mark. What good does ACT 20 do for the business person who wants to sell real physical products to actual human beings? Yes, you can convert a portion of the profits from such an enterprise to service based income by providing marketing services to your physical products company, but wouldn't you rather pay the 9% corporate tax rate on the profit from selling those goods in Montenegro and not have to worry about how the income is categorized by the IRS in a dispute, and maybe pay Zero Percent on the dividends you receive for those distributions as a citizen and tax resident of St. Kitts & Nevis, or a tax resident of Panama or Malaysia receiving those dividends at your home in one of those countries where you have the option of pulling up stakes and changing your tax residency if needed to minimize your taxes, or where you have the option to move the company from Montenegro for a better deal if you find one. I mean the piece of paper creating a corporation can sit in any drawer in any country. As long as that country gives you access to banks that let you move your money and use it freely, it doesn't matter what country the corporate articles are sitting in at the end of the day.
    3
  375. 3
  376. 3
  377. 3
  378. 3
  379. 3
  380. 3
  381. 3
  382. 3
  383. 3
  384. 3
  385. 3
  386. 3
  387. 3
  388. 3
  389. 3
  390. 3
  391. 3
  392. 3
  393. 3
  394. 3
  395. 3
  396. 3
  397. 3
  398. 3
  399. 3
  400. 3
  401. 3
  402. 3
  403. 3
  404. 3
  405. 3
  406. 3
  407. 3
  408. 3
  409. 3
  410. 3
  411. 3
  412. 3
  413. 3
  414. 3
  415. 3
  416. 3
  417. 3
  418. 3
  419.  @TrueEarth369  Thailand has territorial tax so if you are not working and your passive income is earned outside Thailand as long as you keep it in a bank account outside of Thailand the year the dividend is paid, my understanding is the money will not be taxed because they use a remittance based system as well. Thailand has a few double tax treaties with some countries which may also prove beneficial. If you are not an American, but you have US dividend paying stocks for example, I think the Thai treaty will reduce your withholding rate in the US from 30% to 10%. In other words they may or may not be as beneficial as some other countries, but they are not bad. As I understand it, in SEA Hong Kong, Thailand, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Singapore all have a territorial tax regime. In Latin America, Uruguay, Paraguay, Nicarauga, Honduras, Panama, and Costa Rica are territorial tax jurisdictions as I understand it. To a degree, ie no CFC rules, Ecuador is as well if you are not taking money out of a company that is based overseas, but Ecuador has some exit tax risks and does tax worldwide income of individuals. St Lucia in the Caribbean along with Belize in the Anglophone world of the Caribbean are territorial tax, as is Dominican Republic in the Latin American Caribbean. Georgia in Europe/Asia depending on where you draw the line, has a personal territorial tax regime, but a worldwide tax for local companies. On the zero tax front you are looking at Turks & Caicos, the BVI, the Cayman Islands, Anguilla, -for personal income only Antigua & Barbuda, and St. Kitts & Nevis, but their management and control rules regarding corporations may bite you without proper planning. You have Monaco, St. Barthalemy -with some exceptions for zero tax options, Vanuatu as well. Then you have the Gulf states, UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait, but only some have realistic residency options. If you want low tax, Barbados is good for companies, but not so much for individuals. Labuan likewise is good for companies, but I'm not as sure it works in terms of living in Malaysia. I would want advice from local tax counsel about the treatment of dividends & salary paid by a Labuan company to a resident of Malaysia. Then you have Lump Sum tax countries or lump sum tax countries for travelers with Anguilla, Gibraltar, Malta, Switzerland, Jersey, and Guernsey in the Channel Islands. There is also a lump sum regiment for Italy, and there is a 10 year NHR in Portugal that may be zero tax if you have the right circumstances in place. My take is with the right planning SEA provides great options for low or no tax living. If you are somewhat nomadic ie not anywhere for more than 4 months a year, then the territorial tax countries would be great and making a St. Kitts or Antigua your country of citizenship and spending a month or two there may provide you a tax residency certificate if you need it with a bank that is helpful, otherwise in the right circumstances even less time in Georgia may give you one. With the right lump sum payment like 1 month a year in Anguilla will get you.a tax certificate if you aren't in any other country more than 183 days a year. Antigua has a similar deal for non-citizens. Malta has such a deal too. Cyprus may have some non-domiciled residency benefits I haven't quite figured out yet myself. There are a lot of ways to play it, but I will say if your business is structured properly, and you are not actively working in the business Thailand has some potential. If you are working in the business, with the right structuring Thailand could work, as long as you comply with foreign branch rules and hire enough locals to get you a work permit. But it is going to add the expense of transfer pricing studies and may be a giant PITA, although it may be worthwhile. If such a scenario is necessary, ie you working for the business, then a Labuan company in Malaysia might put you in a 3% tax bracket. The Philippines would have the same PITA regarding transfer pricing studies that Thailand would have. Of course if you are living on portfolio income and dividend from publicly traded companies, that is a different story.
    3
  420. My French ancestors were in Quebec before the French & Indian War. My Dutch ancestors were in New York when it was still New Amsterdam. My Mohawk ancestors are in no way helpful with a citizenship by descent especially since they are too small a percentage of my Great Great Grandparents to allow me to be a member of the tribe even. My Irish ancestors moved to Canada at the height of the potato famine, so that means it was my Great Great Grandparents. My Great Grandfather moved to the US & if I knew when I was a kid what I know now, I would have told my grandfather & father to claim their Canadian citizenships so that I could claim mine potentially, but they were both proud soldiers in the US Army who respectively fought in World War II, and Vietnam & the first Gulf War, so that would probably have not went over well with either of them. My maternal Great Grandparents all came to the US from Sweden early last century along with my matrilineal Great Great Grandmother who had been a doctor in Sweden. I have a relative who traced my matrilineal line in Sweden back to a Grandfather born in the 1770s who lived to see the US Revolution & the US Civil War's beginning. I can tell you all that, but as Andrew I am sure knows, Sweden's cruel ironic punchline for me is that while a Swedish mother has always been able to pass citizenship to their children, my Grandmother born in America in 1923, even if her mother never became an American citizen was born an American so unless she went to Sweden before the age of air travel and before she was 21 & opted to be Swedish, she and my mother are both American citizens. Hmmm what was happening in the world by the time my grandmother was 6 years old, a worldwide depression, hmm. As a young adult what was going on in Europe? A World War? If Sweden alters their citizenship by descent rules to allow the descendents of Grandparents born of Swedish ancestry, I'm probably Golden, but as a country that only recently recognized dual citizenship, unless I've read their citizenship by descent statute wrong, and I don't think I have, citizenship by descent for me is a cruel, cruel joke. In no small part because my ancestors were mostly in the United States before it was a country, or Canada before it was a country, left Ireland before it was a country, & well too long ago for British citizenship to apply as well. Canadian citizenship was potentially obtainable in my lifetime, but my grandfather & father would have needed to take some actions. That is a cruel irony because I could be at the Canadian border in 25 minutes & my father routinely went to the Canadian auto-racing track 40 minutes away to work on cars and even played fast pitch softball in a cross border league when I was a kid.
    3
  421. 3
  422. 3
  423. 3
  424. 3
  425. 3
  426. 3
  427. 3
  428. 3
  429. 3
  430. 3
  431. 3
  432. 3
  433. 3
  434. 3
  435. 3
  436. 3
  437. 3
  438. 3
  439. 3
  440. 3
  441. 3
  442. 3
  443. 3
  444. 3
  445. 3
  446. 3
  447. 3
  448. 3
  449. 3
  450. 3
  451. 3
  452. 3
  453. 3
  454. 3
  455. 3
  456. 3
  457. 3
  458. 3
  459. 3
  460. 3
  461. 3
  462. 3
  463. 3
  464. 3
  465. 3
  466. 3
  467. 3
  468. 3
  469. 3
  470. 3
  471. 3
  472. 3
  473. 3
  474. 3
  475. 3
  476. In the US, the best way to avoid the capital gains tax you presented would be to have structured the company as a C-Corp early on and held founders shares under 1202 of the code as a qualified small business, at least after 2010 when the current exemption rate was put into place. In that scenario, assuming the company stock was held 5 years, up to $10 million of gain or 10x the original basis, whichever is greater is exempt from capital gains tax assuming the company has less than $50 million in assets. Why would anyone sell a business with $50 million in assets for $12 million? That would mean instead of paying $2.4 million in federal income tax, the seller would pay $400k in income tax under the current 20% federal capital gains rate. Assuming arguendo the founder is a resident of a zero income tax state like Nevada, Florida, Wyoming, South Dakota, Texas, or Washington, that would be the entire tax bill due. The 1202 provisions of the code make a C-Corp a smart move for any business owner with an exit strategy that has an eye towards selling the business. A healthy salary can eliminate any double tax issues and given the discount presently available for dividend income on Qualified Dividends, that isn't much of an issue these days. The C-Corp also provides additional avenues, especially for the offshore founder to greatly reduce taxes with expenses such as per diems, the FEIE, the Foreign Housing Exclusion, and other travel related business expenses, and or insurance coverage provided by the company to the founder as a means of getting money out of the company with the lowest tax impact.
    3
  477. 2
  478. 2
  479. 2
  480. 2
  481. 2
  482. Alex Fitzgerald the only reason the campaign I helped with in 2016 conducted its own volunteer poll was because no one had conducted any polls in the three way Congressional race. 2 years earlier the Green Party candidate I helped had earned 11% of the vote more than any other Green Party Congressional candidate anywhere had earned to that point, but he was a great candidate -a long time community activist and business owner and a long time friend of Ralph Nader who Ralph personally endorsed and campaigned for -if you look into how often Ralph does that you will find out just how rare a candidate he was but anyhow, every other upstate NY congressional race bordering the largest district east of the Mississippi had been polled, but not ours. We gathered the numbers and got 20 volunteers together to call on their cell phones using a one page script and answer sheet for recording the answers. It took about 4 hours to make the calls and tally the results with people who had never done polling before. The hard part at that point was getting the numbers and cross indexing the voter list for a random sample, but a few months later I learned where I could get the polling sample and numbers cheap through I think Aristotle is the name of the company that does voter information lists like that, and it would have saved a lot of time. It took me a week to compile information I could get from that company’s voter database in a couple of minutes. It took me about a half hour to write the script for the poll callers and the answer sheet to record their answers. Honestly with volunteers campaigns could conduct such polls for almost no money. We did. Traditional polling firms charge tens of thousands of dollars for such polls.
    2
  483. 2
  484. 2
  485. 2
  486. 2
  487. 2
  488. 2
  489. 2
  490. 2
  491. 2
  492. 2
  493. 2
  494. 2
  495. 2
  496. 2
  497. There are also some in the middles class and the poor who can't save enough money to seek opportunities overseas who recognize that there are better opportunities elsewhere. I mean if you can't afford a $400 emergency, you aren't in a position to buy a plane ticket from the US to Cambodia, have a few months of rent money, and pay the costs even $300 or so needed for a Cambodian business visa that would cut your tax rate in half on your first $110k of income, and that is one of the cheaper relocation opportunities for a working class American who can work remotely as an online freelancer. Hell many of those people would have a hard time affording a move from a higher tax state like California or New York to a lower tax state like Nevada, Florida, or Texas. Why else do you think there are so many young people in the US living #VanLife with South Dakota tags and a South Dakota driver's license? Because the cheap rent of the van, and the one night stay in a South Dakota hotel with a receipt which qualifies you for South Dakota residency is the cheapest way for those people to reduce one of their biggest expenses, state taxes. They already eliminated their largest expense of rent and most utility costs by moving into their van. The smarter and more adventurous ones then spend half of the year driving around Canada and half of the year driving around Mexico and Central America specifically to reduce the federal tax expense to just their social security tax on what are often fairly small incomes just to build a nest egg they could never save living in the states.
    2
  498. 2
  499. 2
  500. 2
  501. 2
  502. 2
  503. 2
  504. 2
  505. 2
  506. 2
  507. 2
  508. 2
  509. Heath Fletcher how about being taxed once? Do you think Jeff Bezos has ever paid taxes on 99% of his wealth? No, do you know why? Because he invested X dollars in Amazon when it started and owns Y amount of Amazon stock because of that investment. As the value of the company has grown, so has the value of the stock from his initial investment. He has also gotten stock options which have vested and grown in value. The “strike price” ie the value of those options at the time they were issued has been deducted from Amazon’s income against its tax bill. The company created money to pay Bezos out of thin air in doing so. As the value of the stock that can be bought with those options is now worth more than their original “strike price” the value of Bezos wealth has grown. Bezos paid income tax on the “strike price” of that stock which under current rules had to be priced at the market price of the stock on the day the options were issued, but if Bezos was paid $100,000 in stock options that are now worth $10,000,000, he has not paid income tax on $9,900,000 of that income if he has not sold those options or executed them and bought the underlying stock. If he invested $500,000 to start Amazon and his initial stock is now worth $125,000,000,000 that’s $125 billion -because he has not sold the stock, he has not been taxed at all on the growth in value or the unrecognized income. Under the estate tax rules, the heirs get what is called a “step-up” in basis in the value of the assets they inherit. That means that while Bezos May have paid income tax on $2 million of the $150 billion in value of his estate, $149,998,000,000 of that estate has never had income tax paid on its value. It gets worse with wealth real estate investors such as Donald Trump. Under IRS rules investors pay no income tax on money they are loaned, but they do pay income tax on the money they pay to pay down the principle of the loan and get at tax deduction for the interest they pay for loans to buy or improve investment properties; however, they also get to deduct phantom depreciation losses from income to account for declines in value of a building from its wear and tear to nearly zero -only the value of the land itself cannot be depreciated. They also get to write off repairs and maintenance costs of the property essentially defeating the phantom depreciation losses. This happens even if the actual underlying value of the real estate is growing through appreciation. In other words, real estate investors could literally have never paid one penny in income taxes for their value of the assets they own if they manage their taxes correctly, but under the rules of the estate tax laws their heirs could get a “step-up” in basis to the market value of the underlying properties and never pay one penny in income tax on the gains from the income of selling those properties at the market value of the property that the original investor never paid any income tax on while buying the property. This is why the rich get richer in the first place -because they never pay taxes on 99% of their unrecognized capital gains while workers pay double taxation in the form of social security and Medicare taxes plus the general income tax on all of their earned income. Do you still oppose the estate tax?
    2
  510. 2
  511. 2
  512. 2
  513. 2
  514. 2
  515. 2
  516. 2
  517. 2
  518. 2
  519. 2
  520. 2
  521. 2
  522. 2
  523. 2
  524. The problem with these idiots is that they don’t understand how polling works. When they say that Democrats are “plus 12 nationally” that doesn’t matter. When they say that Beto O’Rourke is up 2 amongst registers voters and down 9 to Cruz amongst “likely voters” that matters. When you tell Republicans in Texas that Beto is up, every single one of them will show up for Cruz. When you tell Democrats that Beto is up 2, half of them will stay home because they don’t understand math. Clearly the TYT crew like the Clinton team don’t understand gerrymandering or the electoral college. Al Gore garnered 500,000 more votes than GW Bush and if the entire state of Florida has been recounted he would have won that recount too -thanks Supreme Court for aborting that count. But Bush got 270. The Democrats have routinely garnered several million more votes for Congress and the Senate than the Republicans, but that is because just 18% of the US population controls 50% of the seats in the Senate. All of those small states are over represented in the Senate and the House. Are there some offsets? Yes, Democrats have Rhode Island, Delaware, and Vermont, but Republicans have Alaska, Wyoming, most of the plains states and most of the mountain west and there are no people there. The Democrats represent more people in the Senate with either California or New York than is represented by all of the people in that 18% of people making up 50% of Senate seats. The Congress hasn’t increased its numbers from 435 in the House in over 100 years. When it was set at 435, about 200k people were in each district. If we had similar numbers today, New York would have 90 seats in the House. Wyoming would get 2 possibly 3. California would have like 185 seats in the House. Yes, Texas would have many more representatives too, as would Florida, Ohio, Illinois, but our system represents empty land, not people. The Democrats will probably get 5 million more votes for House and Senate than Republicans this year and lose seats because of gerrymandering and which states they have to defend in the Senate. Gillibrand will win by at least a million if not 2 million vote margin in NY. Nelson will win by a couple of touchdowns in Florida thanks to Gillum, then McKaskill will lose, Hietkamp will lose, and Tester will lose. Cruz will win easily. Arizona and Nevada will stay red. Manchin will have a close call or may lose in W Va. because Trump people will GOTV to protect him from impeachment. The same will happen in Indiana where the Democratic incumbent will face a nail biter. The fact is that even Sherod Brown in Ohio is going to have a tougher slog than expected because the Trump faithful will GOTV to protect their guy from impeachment. He has delivered on more of his promises than any President in my lifetime. I disagree with 90% of what he has done, but he has mostly done what he said he would do and that is going to GOTV amongst his supporters and they live in places that he won. All those Senate states are places that he won handily -save Nevada, but they have an incumbent Republican and tie goes to the incumbent usually. I say this all as a hard left leftist. The problem with progressives is that they think we live in a democracy. We don’t. We live in a Republic that was designed to protect slave owners and their land. Absent a Tahrir Square style peaceful revolt with a strong democracy movement calling for abdications, resignations, and a New Democratic Constitution, there will be no change until the places that are dying in America kill the places that are still economically viable. Ie rural America killing off the urban economies.
    2
  525. 2
  526. 2
  527. 2
  528. 2
  529. 2
  530. 2
  531. I just apply the Walmart parking lot test. In February my local Walmart parking lot was full up from about 6am to about 8pm most days. Now it is about 1/3 or 1/4 full even at the noon rush and it is the only store open for the most part. I also apply the Texas Roadhouse/Olive Garden test. In February you had a 30 to 50 minute wait to get a table at either restaurant all the time. Even at 50% seating capacity today I can get right in at either place and about 1/10th of the 50% capacity seating is empty. There is no demand in the economy. I also apply the Lowes test and it's parking lot was usually at about 80% capacity most days. Now when I go there at best it is at 50% capacity and mind you people have a lot of time on their hands to do yard work and to fix the problems in their house, but there is still very low demand. There is zero demand in the economy right now and even though most people are sick and tired of being cooped up, they are fearful to some degree of getting sick or getting a family member sick and causing their demise. They also in large numbers have serious economic concerns because they are unemployed or a family member is unemployed, or they have a job that they fear will be eliminated. This even includes people like my sister who is a tenured public school French teacher and the only French teacher in her school. She wonders if the school will re-open at all in September and this is a rural school without 100% internet access for it's students. Online and distance learning was not working for their district very well. She is also concerned that with the dried up tax revenue that the French language program may be eliminated and only Spanish will be offered as a foreign language. She is fairly certain that the Mandarin language offered at her school through an extension program with the Board of Cooperative Educational Services will be eliminated because it has the smallest number of students and it will save a lot of money for the school if it is eliminated. If tenured public school teachers are worried about the potential for unemployment, there are plenty of factory workers worried. Hell the local hospital laid off staff in the middle of a pandemic because the lack of elective surgeries put them tits up, so you tell me.
    2
  532. 2
  533. 2
  534. 2
  535. 2
  536. 2
  537. 2
  538. 2
  539. 2
  540. 2
  541. 2
  542. 2
  543. 2
  544. 2
  545. 2
  546. 2
  547. 2
  548. 2
  549. 2
  550. 2
  551. 2
  552. 2
  553. 2
  554. 2
  555. 2
  556. Linux is complicated because it's greatest strength is also it's greatest weakness. The abundance of choice is Linux's great strength, but that is it's weakness too. if you give people 3 choices they can pick one. I mean Windows, Mac, or Linux would be an easy choice, but it's not Windows, Mac or Linux. It's Windows, Mac or Arch, Manjaro, Gentoo, Fedora, CentOS, Debian, Ubuntu, Pop! OS, Linux Mint, MX Linux, Zorin, Redhat Enterprise Linux, Hannah Montana Linux, etc. But the choices don't end there. While one Mac looks mostly like another with minor tweaks between updates, and this same holds true with Windows for the most part, with Linux you get to decide if you like a tiling windows manager, or a more traditional desktop environment. Do you want Gnome, Cinnamon, XFE, KDE, Pantheon, Mate? Oh the choices don't stop there, what theme do you want with that desktop environment? Oh, is that file manager not your cup of tea, well maybe you should try Nautilus or Dolphin, or whatever the myriad of other choices may be. Yes, it's great that you can make Linux work for you the way you want it to work, which makes it complicated, but it also makes it a tinkerer's operating system and a coder's operating system that is never quite ready for the masses. Are there Distributions that would be great for mass market adoption? Absolutely. There are super stable and fairly easy to use offerings fro. The Ubuntu, RHEL, and Debian lines amongst others that would meet most desktop users needs are great, but unless and until a company chooses one distro and tweaks it to be absolutely perfect to sell to schools, or government agencies, or businesses for office work and really puts a sales force on the ground to secure big contracts, Linux will never gain mass market adoption on the desktop. The smartest move Apple made was aggressively going after the public school, college and university markets in the 1980s and 1990s. A Linux hardware company choosing a rock solid distro with the bells and whistles to make desktop Linux easy to manage for school IT admins would be the smart move. System 76 would be better served employing a sales team to get Pop! OS desktops and laptops I to schools than building a new DE in Rust. Google Chrome has made inroads to the school sales market because it's an easy system for school IT people to administer, but with state and federal educational privacy laws, Linux is far better positioned to take those contracts. A company just needs to go after those sales.
    2
  557. 2
  558. 2
  559. 2
  560. 2
  561. 2
  562. 2
  563. 2
  564. 2
  565. 2
  566. I would make a bet that the Tax Fairness for Americans Abroad Act has a better chance of passing in the next 4 years than an increased tax on the wealthy. A) the Democrats will never end the Social Security cap, because it is too easy for real business owners to avoid the tax by taking their earnings in dividends, while even though loan-out companies make it relatively easy for celebrity actors, musicians, and athletes to avoid as well, it could hurt new celebrities who haven't put their financial plans in place and there is no way the Democratic Party is going to hurt their donor base B) Making a case for ending Taxation Without Representation strengthens the case to admit Puerto Rico and DC as States. The Tax Fairness for Americans Abroad Act creates a new valuable loophole for the Uber wealthy that the Democratic and Republican donor base highly support. If rates were to go up, the TFAAA would definitely be the pressure relief valve for the Uber wealthy. You would almost immediately see a Mark Cuban, a Mark Zuckerberg, and a Bill Gates dividing their time between newly acquired homes or previously owned homes in the Bahamas, St. Kitts, Guernsey, Gibraltar, Anguilla, BVI, Vanuatu, European residences, New Zealand, Australia, and South and Central America deploying your Trifecta strategy while their tax residence is an Anguilla, UAE, BVI, St. Kitts, Gibraltar, Monaco, Guernsey, Jersey, Isle of Mann or some other baseline zero tax or territorial taxed residence where they have no business holdings. I mean Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Panama, the Philippines all with high top line, but purely territorial taxes would be common place. New beach house construction in the Caymans would boom.
    2
  567. 2
  568. 2
  569. 2
  570. I was recently reading on the EU website about work rights available to citizens of 59 African, Pacific, and Caribbean nations, including the 5 Caribbean CBI countries that provide equal work-permit free access to countries aside from the EU nation where such citizens may have obtained a visa. I must admit, as is often the case with the EU website the answers were fairly opaque. It does appear that the right to self-employment would attach which could be useful for a budding Nomad Capitalist in such a situation, but it is unclear if the right of establishment ie to set-up and manage a corporation as opposed to a sole proprietorship in multiple EU countries would attach for such citizens after obtaining a residency visa in at least one Schengen country. If these rights along with the OECS freedom of movement rights for several Caribbean countries attach to a CBI passport along with the CARICOM rights of freedom of movement for skilled workers, then anyone with a university degree including certain associates degrees or other specified skills they can meaningfully demonstrate is given a lot of added value by a CBI passport. I mean the CARICOM skilled worker rights include a right of establishment which can be very valuable in one market specifically which has significant tax advantages. The CARICOM & OECS freedom of movement rights of citizens is very clear. The potential freedom of movement/work & freedom of establishment rights that may attach to a Caribbean CBI passport when it is used to obtain an EU residence visa if that is the case would in my opinion make those Tier B Passports at least a Tier B+. I suspect you have found out more about this opaque aspect of passports from the 59 countries and EU residency visas, but I don't think I have ever heard it discussed. If the right of establishment & freedom of movement without a work permit attaches for these passport holders when the obtain any EU residence visa this makes it much easier to structure international companies in the most tax advantageous way. I mean having to obtain residency in multiple EU countries just to set up and manage various subsidiaries would be much more difficult than securing one residency because you did so with a Caribbean CBI passport that allows you to work in any EU country without a work permit or residency visa just like an EU citizen when you are merely a resident of one EU country.
    2
  571. 2
  572. A Tiblisi fee zone company with common shares owned by the entrepreneur and preferred shares owned by an Antigua & Barbuda company looks like an interesting way to potentially avoid most taxes. It will cost a little over $5k a year in company fees and free zone license costs to keep the Georgian and Antiguan companies in good standing, but if you took a $12k a year salary from the Georgian Company, then depending on whether or not a non-resident employee of the Antiguan company is that same entrepreneur director of the Georgian Company could likely pay up to the limit the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion and it would likely cost about $8k or so to set up the structure. No one would think that the Antiguan company with a 25% corporate tax rate is saving you money, but if the Antiguan social security taxes don't apply even with annual licensing and company fees you are at 6% tax and with those Antiguan social security taxes you are still lower than just the US social security rate on a US based salary, like 12% overall, but I suspect the social security tax will not apply to such an Antiguan company. That requires more research. Of course anyone other than US taxpayers have less issues to think about here, but if structured properly an American can reduce their taxes a fair amount with this structure for a company that isn't a start-up, but isn't a really large enterprise yet either. I mean a blogger or online marketer with a solid low six figure business could save on tax while growing the company and saving up for an economic citizenship for example. Even though Georgia doesn't recognize the legitimacy of the old US-USSR Tax treaty, the US does, so operating servers through AWS won't create a permanent establishment in the US. Georgia's tax treaties with Ireland and Singapore allow a SaaS start-up to make use of AWS servers in those countries too and avoid a permanent establishment. Georgia looks very good indeed for a bootrapped start-up if you structure the company correctly and take advantage of it's free zones. If an American entrepreneur positioned themselves to be able to renounce US citizenship and travel on say a St. Kitts passport even, they could with a proper buy-sell agreement executed at the time of purchase between the Antiguan company and the Georgian Company reacquire the preferred shares and close down the Antiguan company. If the company became a big success and the entrepreneur was earning more than $200k a year they could easily take advantage of short term stays in Georgia for the purpose of tax residency coupled to the permanent residency that should be available by operating their company to travel the world quite freely without too many tax concerns, except of course spending too much time in the wrong country. If they are staying in Malaysia, Thailand, the Phillipinnes, Panama, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, other territorial tax countries, or if they move to the Caymans, BVI, Anguilla, Antigua, the Bahamas or St. Kitts, their tax free lifestyle would be very easy to maintain. I mean once they have permanent residency in Georgia there is no reason to draw a salary when they can be paid tax free with dividends from a free zone company. Upon closer inspection the Antigua plan has a problem. That problem is the lack of deductibility of salaries.
    2
  573. 2
  574. 2
  575. 2
  576. 2
  577.  @utube7917  Google is your first friend. Start looking at PDF files that Deloitte publishes annually for most countries. They are called Deloitte Highlights. They will be labeled by year, 2019, 2020, etc. Start looking at the Price Waterhouse Cooper's website again Google is your friend. Look up a country and withholding tax. You will find standard withholding rates on the Deloitte Highlights, but PWC's site will usually tell you country specific withholding rates. This begins showing you which countries have tax treaties with other countries. Google the two countries' names and double tax treaty. In many instances you will be able to easily find the double tax treaties of the parties. Some times they are harder to find. The IRS has them for the US. Ireland has a good collection of theirs. The Republic of Georgia does well providing text of theirs, Singapore & Hong Kong both do a good job of providing their double tax treaties. Canada does a good job of providing theirs. Countries that are unexpected tax havens are places like Malta. You should read their tax treaties, and look into information on tax residency, tax domicile and articles or videos about how it is seperated. The usual suspects locations like the Caribbean have almost all been forced by the EU blacklist & restrictions on their banks to adopt economic substance rules that make things tough. You should read a few articles on how territorial tax works & you should review how it works specifically in Panama - pay attention to how Panama's management & Control Rules work in regards to taxation. You should read or watch a video about the Double Irish with a Dutch Sandwich. You should read up on the Single Malt & realize that the EU & Ireland & Malta have implemented some rules to shut those loopholes down & read how to get around the efforts to close the loop holes. I highly recommend close scrutiny of Malta's tax treaties en masse. Google and read a few articles more academic the better about "web servers as permanent establishments." Read the OECD postion on the webserver as permanent establishments. Carefully read the permanent establishments sections of double tax treaties. Look for subtle differences. Compare Barbados US tax treaty with the Barbados Canada one closely. Countries that could be big players in any strategy using some of the complicated structures that may need to be deployed are Singapore, Hong Kong, Malta, Ireland, Luxembourg, Barbados, Laubuan companies in Malaysia, read the Australia Malaysia treaty to see how troubling Laubuan can be to some of the Tier A countries. The UAE of course & their tax treaties. Google free zone companies & read various statutes on Georgia Free Zone & Virtual Zone companies. Google economic substance act or laws in Cayman Islands, BVI, Barbados, Anguilla, Turks & Caicos, Bahamas, Bermuda. Google how to get a bank account for an XYZ company for any country you are interested in deploying as part of a structure. Today this is often the hardest part. Getting a bank account for operations & payment. Next start thinking about work permits & residency in countries you would want to or need to operate from. I mean getting a work permit for your Thailand Representative Office of your Philippine subsidiary of your UAE holding company for your Singapore company that is managed & controlled from Malta not to mention work permits & residency visas for Malta, Thailand, & the Philippines while finding a resident director for that Singapore company who lives in Singapore could present some challenges, not to mention the costs of maintaining the UAE company. Work permits for the people you need to operate that Cayman Islands company you were thinking about may be tough after you read the economic substance laws. Do you have a university degree? That Saint Kitts citizenship may have some added benefits under the CARICOM Freedom of Movement & Establishment rules & laws. You may want to think about how big the CARICOM workforce is & the benefits of Barbados vs the Caymans if you really want that Caribbean lifestyle. You may also want to carefully read Barbados's tax residency rules for companies. Read a few of the Companies Acts in the various old school tax havens. I mean compare Bahamas & Cayman or BVI to Vanuatu. I mean what constitutes doing business where. Can you hold a board meeting their without having to register?
    2
  578. 2
  579. 2
  580. 2
  581. 2
  582. 2
  583. 2
  584. 2
  585. 2
  586. 2
  587. 2
  588. 2
  589. 2
  590. 2
  591. 2
  592. 2
  593. 2
  594. 2
  595. 2
  596. 2
  597. 2
  598. 2
  599. 2
  600. 2
  601. 2
  602. 2
  603. 2
  604. 2
  605. 2
  606. 2
  607. Bezos actually didn't make that much real money last year. Lee Camp is correct in his analysis of the stock or securities market in the United States and around the world as little more than a ponzi scheme. Bezo's wealth is in the form of a fictional asset value to the stock of Amazon. How else do you explain a company which generated about $10 billion in profit, which means assets reasonably valued at maybe $30 to $50 billion being valued at $1 Trillion? Now Apple earned 8 to 10x Amazon's profits last year and realistically might have an actual asset valuation at between $300 and $500 billion, but again, not the $1 Trillion valuation it presently is given by the ponzi scheme known as the stock market. We need real regulations that change the game once and for all and that comes in the form of laws which outlaw wage slavery entirely. How? By making it illegal for any business that operates as a corporation to employ people, and requiring that businesses be either sole proprietorships, partnerships, worker-owned cooperatives, or hybrid worker/consumer-owned cooperatives. Of course, it should be illegal for sole proprietors to employ anyone other than him or herself, and it should be illegal for partnerships to employ anyone other than partners under such a law. Not-for-Profit corporations would be allowed to contract a worker-owned cooperative to carry out their mission, and you could still contract a worker such as a professional who was self-employed, like a gardener who mowed multiple people's lawns, or a lawyer, doctor, dentist, or accountant. You would be able to hire a full time domestic worker or personal security professional for a celebrity for example, but there would be relatively few exceptions for private employees. Government being another obvious exception, although realistically, probably should be contracted to a worker cooperative too with civil service rules and open membership of cooperatives -I digress. If we wrote a law outlawing private employment in 99% of situations - then the entire economy would be transformed to value labor and work in its superior position to capital as Abraham Lincoln, a Republican President said was its proper place.
    2
  608. 2
  609. 2
  610. 2
  611. 2
  612. 2
  613. 2
  614. 2
  615. Abosutely people should be able to buy citizenship. I see you did not mention Eric Schmidt the deca-billionaire CEO of Google purchased EU citizenship in that same Cypriot program. Why did he do that? Because it allows him to invest in Europe in a manner that would be unlawful if he were only an American. Does anyone really want to prevent people with money from making investments in Europe that will improve job prospects & economic development? This is especially true in Eastern states of the Union & many nations of Southern Europe which will be greatly improved by the influx of successful Chinese, South Asian, Southeast Asia, American & Canadian entrepreneurs who have taken advantage of these programs along with investors from the Middle East hoping to improve their ability to travel after finding business success in a region which outside of the UAE has a terrible passport. No one outside of at a minimum a deca-millionaire is purchasing an EU passport because the investment in either Cyprus or Malta was a more than a million US dollars and about a million Euros or more. Most of the people using Golden Visas for secure EU passports through residency are at least worth a million dollars on average. No one is spending $350k US dollars to pay cash for a home in Portugal who is not at least worth $500k in liquid assets with a high income outside the country. While a golden residency visa was not involved in the grant of citizenship to Rita Wilson & her husband Tom Hanks, the two have maintained a vacation home in Greece for a number of years. Does anyone really have a problem with wealthy individuals spending money, paying VAT, paying property taxes, and in many instances taking up residence in the EU and becoming taxpayers at the top end of a progressive tax rate while setting up new businesses in the EU? I mean it is far easier to start a company in an EU country as a Maltese citizen than it is as a citizen of the Philippines, but the deca-millionaire from the Philippines who started a successful call center business in their country for example who now wants to build a new company in Czechia is a problem. The fact that he paid Malta more than a million dollars to do so and obtained a passport that affords him an easier ability to do so is a problem. Because let's be honest people who are obtaining these citizenships for the most part are successful business people from countries with bad passports who want to be able to travel & invest more easily than they can in their home countries, and a few Americans who want to be able to return to the US without hassle after they give up their US citizenship. The ones who are investing in Malta to obtain such a passport or buying a Portuguese Golden Visa to do so are successful business people who want to be able to structure their businesses in a tax favorable way without being taxed by the United States when they haven't lived in the US for a decade.
    2
  616. 2
  617. 2
  618. 2
  619. 2
  620. 2
  621. 2
  622. 2
  623. Whytebio if the wealthy are paying 87% of the taxes -which they aren’t it is 40% and actually much less when property taxes, sales taxes, state fees, and the tax on labor is factored, more like 26% of the taxes then despite the top 5% owning and controlling 85% of the assets in the country then taxes are too low because the wealthy have a privilege that the working class does not enjoy, a control over their taxes and when they are paid. The majority of income to the wealthy is untaxed entirely in the form of unrecognized capital gains. Most of the $150 billion that Jeff Bezos has is the result of a 0% tax rate on unrecognized capital gains. When the tax rates were higher in the 1950s- 1970s there was an incentive to hire new sales people and new R&D people an borrow to build a new plant and buy new equipment and pay interest on loans to grow the productivity of a company because you could either internalize the gains by letting money you would otherwise pay in taxes be written off as a deductible expense that grew and strengthened your business, or you could pay the taxes. When the rate is 70 to 93 percent you take the deductions and grow your business to create untaxed and unrecognized capital gains. When the tax code is as it is written today, you pay the taxes and buy back stock to artificially inflate the value of stock options created out of thin air for insider executives and as long inflate the value of stock for key insider investors and hedge fund buddies who will manipulate the price to fleece the pension funds of the working class invested via mutual funds because the tax rates favor paper gains over genuine growth and the consumer class’s disintegration. Choose your path. One created a vibrant middle class the other destroyed a vibrant middle class.
    2
  624. 2
  625. 2
  626. 2
  627. 2
  628. 2
  629. 2
  630. 2
  631. 2
  632. 2
  633. 2
  634. 2
  635. 2
  636. 2
  637. 2
  638. 2
  639. 2
  640. 2
  641. 2
  642. 2
  643. 2
  644. 2
  645. 2
  646. Let's say that you won the current Powerball and had to split it with one other person who you play the game with in a partnership. You get about $60 million after paying taxes at least in NY. If you put that money into a municipal money market fund with Vanguard you would currently get about 3-4% in annual interest -most likely tax free as it has minimal exposure to income from private benefit muni bonds like those used to build airports or stadiums which can be subject to the alternative minimum tax. That means you will have just under $2 million a year in spendable cash from that jackpot. You can rent a very nice place in Monaco, or Dubai with that money and spend basically nothing to live on out of those funds annually. And as Grant Cardone pointed out, nobody asks if you rent the big house you live in or if you own it, but renting gives you even more freedom than buying. If you decide you want to move, you can do it next year. In this day and age with companies and channels like Nomad Capitalist around getting help to alleviate yourself from the tax burdens that come with being an American are readily available and you would have the money to invest to get Maltese citizenship and maybe a backup like St Kitts or Dominica without blinking an eye. That means you could grow that nest egg by investing in a diversified stock and bond index fund and if you do so correctly pay only about 15% at the high end on dividend income, while paying 0% on interest income or capital gains income. Or you could remain a US citizen and still pay relatively little tax on dividend and interest income with proper planning ie muni bonds for interest and the same diversified index fund with long term capital gains treatment for mostly qualified dividends. There are places to live with zero property tax like the Cayman Islands, Monaco, or Dubai if you want to buy a place to live, but nice places there will be costly with the biggest cost being lost growth in your investment portfolio. Even in the hottest real estate market on earth you will not get the growth you get with the S&P 500. Rent, don't buy, and charter whether it is a yacht, or a plane if that is how you want to travel, but aside from short haul flights to avoid connection delays, even then flying first or business class on international airlines is probably a better deal. You can live on the dividends and interest and live well without ever touching the principle, so why would you.
    2
  647. 2
  648. Nobody has any fucking money. The last time that happened was in the 1930s. That was deflation. It's gonna happen in a big way following this mess. If you are the CEO of a company that produced more with it's telecommuting workforce how are you going to justify $100k a month in office space rent and overhead to your board? You are not and your workforce will remain telecommuters. There goes the commercial real estate prices. Oh so those office workers who now work from home aren't out to lunch with co-workers at the restaurant anymore so the restaurants aren't making any money and they closed up shop. Hmm, commercial real estate takes another hit. The loss of servers hurt the already struggling retailers and the mall closed along with a whole bunch of other stores. Oh, so commerical real estate takes another hit. What do you mean you are not renewing your $3000 a month lease here in San Francisco or New York City? You are moving to West Podunk Nowhere because you are afraid you could get sick in the next pandemic if you live in the city and you can buy a house in the country fro $75k. The house was $150k before all of the foreclosures brought on by the pandemic. Oh, seven of your other co-tennants in this apartment building who all telecommute are doing the same thing? Shit, I'm gonna have to lower the rent. Housing costs are gonna drop through the floor in cities around the country because of telecommuting and the loss of service work and retail and restaurants. Nobody went out to the new Avenger's movie because they are afraid they would get sick. They will pay $25 to watch it at home on their big screen, but they aren't going out to the theater even though it re-opened? Shit, AMC was already bankrupt now you are telling me 500 small indie theaters and Regal are in bankruptcy too. What do you mean no one is buying new shirts and we need to close down the line in our new Vietnam facility. Nobody is spending any money because 30 million people are out of work. What do you mean that government workers had to take a 15% paycut because the city doesn't have enough sales tax revenue to pay it's workforce. That is literally the headline from my local paper today! Deflation is gonna hit in a big frigging way!
    2
  649. 2
  650. The problem with polling is that it is done nationally and is completely irrelevant on a district by district basis because of gerrymandering. Also polling “likely” voters versus “registered” voters in Texas shows that Ted Cruz is 9 points ahead versus the 2 points ahead Beto is amongst registered voters. The reality is that the Democrats will get 4 to 5 million MORE votes than the Republicans, but those votes will come in places where Democrats live -ie where the jobs and economic lifeblood of the country is located, and the Republicans will win all of the empty rural spaces in America that are dying off and those areas that are dying off will kill whatever is left that is vibrant in America. Welcome to the realities of a failed system of government that is designed to value empty land over people. The Senate should no longer exist. It is an antiquated undemocratic institution and a vestige of concessions made to the slave states as is the electoral college which too should be eliminated. Voting is not going to solve this problem. A sustained non-violent revolutions carried out in a majority of state capitals and DC a la Tahrir Square is the only thing that is going to fix this problem. Abdication, resignations, and a new constitution should be the rallying call and cry of the day. When Democrats get 4 to 5 million more votes for Congress and the Senate this fall and remain in the minority and even lose Senate seats and probably a house seat or two, just remember that this system is not designed to represent people. It was designed to protect slave owners and their land.
    2
  651. 2
  652. 2
  653. 2
  654. 2
  655. 2
  656. 2
  657. 2
  658. 2
  659. 2
  660. 2
  661. DarkSideSixOfficial I am not talking about the watered down OFF Act or the fake Green New Deal proposed by Bernie or AOC, but the Green New Deal of Howie Hawkins the original Green New Dealer who first proposed the plan in his 2010 NY Gubernatorial run. Hawkins plan will transform the economy to a system of worker owned cooperatives. Retrofit ever US home for energy efficiency, do the same for ever government and commercial building. Rebuild the grid with smart grid technology. Provide a federal jobs guarantee that establishes a true wage floor. Move the entire economy to wind, solar, hydro, and tidal power while funding fusion research to the point it should be commercially viable within 5 years. Invests in battery and fuel cell technology to provide both grid level storage and a transportation infrastructure that eliminates oil usage within a decade. His original goal date was next year. The Hawkins plan also addresses monocrop agriculture and livestock agriculture’s negative impact on the environment and creates a path to sustainable local farms without corporate subsidies of the present system. Hawkins plan makes both the OFF Act and Sander’s faux Green New Deal look like a minor tweak to the system. The Hawkins plan completely transforms the US economy to address systemic changes needed beyond the environment to protect the environment. The most likely nominee of the Green Party for the Presidency in 2020 who is a co-founder of the Green Party USA and who was endorsed and encouraged to run by a plethora of Green Party stalwarts makes both plans look very weak by comparison. The Hawkins plan will put a Green technology factory with thousands of jobs in every single Congressional district in the USA. The Hawkins plan at a minimum will create 20 million new jobs to accomplish the task of getting us to zero carbon emissions in a decade.
    2
  662. 2
  663. 2
  664. 2
  665. 2
  666. 2
  667. 2
  668. 2
  669. 2
  670. 2
  671. 2
  672. 2
  673. 2
  674. Its easy what you would do with that much money, especially if you take the lump sum payment. 1) Create a Private Operating Foundation and place 30% of the total dollars won -including those the tax man will be holding into that operating foundation which you will be a member of the board of directors of and with that money buy a descent regional bank worth about $500 million maybe more, maybe less depending on what that 30% looks like. Use the dividends paid by that wholly owned bank which endows the Private Foundation to fund scientific research, arts grants, housing grants, food banks, and scholarships. 2) Donate 20% of the total won, including the money the tax man will still be holding to various other private charities. This will leave you about 5% of the cash you received. 3) Re-direct the bank you own and run now to start loaning money to start-up worker cooperatives and to finance the conversion of existing businesses into worker owned cooperatives. This way you have control of a lot of money and you have economic power like J. Paul Getty did, but you don't personally own much, so you are powerful, but you aren't paying a lot of taxes, in fact, Uncle Sam and the state will owe you a massive refund, approximately HALF of what you received. This means that you will still have an enormous personal fortune, but you now have far more economic control and clout with the bank your foundation owns. 4) Pay off all of your personal debts from the initial cash winnings. 5) Next year, get that big tax refund. 6) Put 3/4 of the money into an index fund. Put 15% of the money into a personal investment account where you can take whatever risks you want and do whatever you want to do in terms of risky businesses. Set 2.5% aside into a trust fund for your family and invest that money into an index fund. Set this up as an irrevocable trust, and take the gift tax hit. With 2.5% of the money, pay the gift tax on that inheritance you set up as a generation skipping grantor trust for your family. With the remaining 5% do whatever the hell you want. That is your play and splurge money. 7) Put 1/3 of your annual dividends and capital gains into the charity foundation. Pay Taxes with 20% of the dividends and gains remaining. Re-invest 35% of the dividends and gains, and live on the 15% of dividends and gains remaining for the rest of your days.
    2
  675. 2
  676. 2
  677. 2
  678. 2
  679. 2
  680. 2
  681. 2
  682. 2
  683. 2
  684. 2
  685. 2
  686. 2
  687. 2
  688. 2
  689. 2
  690. 2
  691. 2
  692. 2
  693. 2
  694. 2
  695. 2
  696. 2
  697. 2
  698. Well Joe, lab grown steaks, chicken, bacon, ham, hamburger that will be grown at the grocery store in small scale bioreactors will put ranchers, slaughterhouses, warehousemen, and truckers out of work in a big way and when those lab grown meats incubated in stores with cashierless check out a la Amazon’s current experiments become a thing those are literally millions of jobs gone. When automated trucks are driving all of the chemicals to fuel those bioreactors to those stores there are millions more jobs gone. With the new generation of robots replacing seamstresses at clothing factories there are millions more jobs gone. Those robot masons and the robotic mason tender machines being built to replace the laborers feeding blocks to the current generation of robot masons seems like construction work is getting replaced. The real question seems to be -what jobs will be left? I mean automated snow plow drivers are definitely going to be employed by the various northern states in the next decade and that will reduce budgets. Why are we sending kids to schools when we can provide online learning courses with AI adaptive testing and peer grading and/or AI grading of exams? I mean we have solid AI grammar software that can check that and we know how to create document readers that could grade even essay exams and use peer review for further crowd sourced grading so what won’t be more automated? Hell there was an AI film editor that pieced together a pretty damned good trailer a couple of years ago already.
    2
  699. 2
  700. 2
  701. Ultimately as a Marxist I agree with this analysis and the income tax, the corporate incomes tax, along with tariffs, VATS and sales taxes are all ways that taxes on labour are hidden. The capitalists have convinced the working class that more taxes on their labour are good, but taxes on capital which do not exist are unworkable and higher rates will be unfair. The corporate tax rate should be zero. The sales tax rate or VAT should be zero. The tariff rate should be zero. If you want to provide socials like a national pension scheme or a national health insurance scheme or public education or daycare, then you can have a social security tax, but that tax should be at a rate of 100% of a salary paid to an employee and the tax should be fully paid by the employer. The "sole" proprietorship or "general partnership" should not exist, or if they do, a clear delineation between salary or wages paid to the owner and capital accumulation should be drawn. As a Marxist then if you want to tax capital, how to do so is easy. You use a balance sheet tax and a capital gains tax on actual sales. It is not an income tax and it is not an unworkable wealth tax. It is a tax on capital accumulation. The current tax code and system of taxation creates an unnecessary cadre of bullshit jobs just to avoid taxes. I appreciate the capitalists who take the steps to avoid the hidden taxes on labour in the current system. The company that designs a shoe and phases out it's production in various nations to avoid tariffs is avoiding taxes on labour hidden to their consumers. I appreciate the company that avoids taxes on their intellectual property by setting up operations in tax favorable jurisdictions which again means another indirect tax on labour is avoided. The current system of taxation hides taxes on labour and convinces people that higher taxes on their labour are needed. No a tax on capital is what is needed.
    2
  702. 2
  703. 2
  704. 1
  705. 1
  706. 1
  707. 1
  708. 1
  709. 1
  710. 1
  711. 1
  712. 1
  713. 1
  714. 1
  715. 1
  716. 1
  717. 1
  718. 1
  719. 1
  720. 1
  721. 1
  722. 1
  723. 1
  724. 1
  725. 1
  726. 1
  727. 1
  728. 1
  729. 1
  730. 1
  731. 1
  732. 1
  733. 1
  734. 1
  735. 1
  736. 1
  737. 1
  738. 1
  739. 1
  740. 1
  741. 1
  742. 1
  743. 1
  744. 1
  745. 1
  746. 1
  747. 1
  748. 1
  749. 1
  750. 1
  751. 1
  752. 1
  753. 1
  754. 1
  755. 1
  756. 1
  757. 1
  758. 1
  759. 1
  760. 1
  761. 1
  762. 1
  763. 1
  764. 1
  765. 1
  766. 1
  767. 1
  768. 1
  769. 1
  770. 1
  771. 1
  772. 1
  773. 1
  774. 1
  775. 1
  776. 1
  777. 1
  778. 1
  779. 1
  780. 1
  781. 1
  782. 1
  783. 1
  784. 1
  785. 1
  786. 1
  787. 1
  788. 1
  789. 1
  790. 1
  791. 1
  792. 1
  793. 1
  794. 1
  795. 1
  796. 1
  797. 1
  798. 1
  799. 1
  800. 1
  801. 1
  802. 1
  803. 1
  804.  @steven-k.  BVI, Turks & Caicos, and Cayman Islands BOTC's access is not the same 180 days as Canadians and Bermudians. They also require a pre-clearance like other Visa Waiver Program participants. The Bermudians which is separate from even belonger status -Bermuda is the only one of the BOT's with 3 tiers of status the way I understand it, are eligible like Canadians to enter the US for a visit without preclearance. BOTC's of Bermuda who do not have Bermudian status -which is a possibility, have to apply for a visa to the US. There are Bermudians, then there are naturalized BOTC's of Bermuda who are belongers, but not Bermudians, then there are natural born BOTC's of Bermuda who are not belongers necessarily unless their parent's are Bermudians in which case they are not only belongers, but likely Bermudians. Then there are Permanent Resident's who are Commonwealth Citizens who if they have been in Bermuda since the 1980s may be Bermudians and are belongers, then there are Permanent Residents who are not commonwealth citizens who are potentially eligible to become belongers if they naturalize. Then there are people who might be eligible to become Permanent Residents who have a path to becoming belongers, but not Bermudians. Then there are residents with no path to permanent residency. Having actual Bermudian status which is a separate category and not merely belonger status is required for the special access to the US enjoyed by Bermudians. Unless you are married to a Bermudian or have been in Bermuda as a resident since the 1980s I do not believe there is a path to Bermudian status, but there may be a path to belonger status. It is a weird place in terms of how it's "citizenship" and nationality works. You may be a Bermuda citizen, but never become a national entitled to vote. As for TN visa access Mexican and Canadian citizens are both eligible for those visas under the NAFTA replacement treaty that creates a special business visitor visa category for all 3 countries under the free trade agreement.
    1
  805. 1
  806. 1
  807. 1
  808. 1
  809. 1
  810. 1
  811. 1
  812. 1
  813. 1
  814. 1
  815. 1
  816. 1
  817. 1
  818. 1
  819. 1
  820. 1
  821. 1
  822. 1
  823. 1
  824. 1
  825. 1
  826. 1
  827. 1
  828. 1
  829. 1
  830. 1
  831. 1
  832. 1
  833. 1
  834. 1
  835. 1
  836. 1
  837. 1
  838. 1
  839. 1
  840. 1
  841. 1
  842. 1
  843. 1
  844. 1
  845. 1
  846. Asset appreciation is gone. Cars are worth less, houses are worth less, automation and productivity increases have made most consumer goods cheaper and cheaper. Demand destruction has crippled the energy markets. Oil storage facilities are at capacity and idled plants and office space has reduced the demand for coal fired power. The negative interest rates caused by the Fed makes borrowing money cheap, but the consumer is maxed out and jobs are scarce, so they are not taking on more debt. Without consumers businesses have no reason to take on debt risks even if money is cheap. I mean would you buy a new 737 for your airline right now? Hell no! So what do you do with cash on hand? You hold onto it. Market disruptions from a lack of available labor because of the health risks and government regulations as well as stockpiling of food for the lean times is artificially inflating food prices and naturally inflating food prices all at the same time, but food is relatively abundant. Because of demand destruction in restaurants and packing plants crippled by illness food costs are inflating, but that is relatively temporary. Of course the velocity of money has slowed to a crawl. No one will invest in this environment because consumers know they can buy more car with the money in their pockets two months from now than they can buy today because inventory is only going up because there are no buyers. The same is true for houses. Businesses know that they can buy more office computers in six months than they can buy today for less money because there are no buyers. They also know in six months they will be able to get better workers for half their current rates, so why hire now when their money will get better people in six months. Deflation is inevitable for those reasons alone, but when you add in the fact that six months from now there may still be lockdowns because there is no cure, we could have yet another virus emerge as a pandemic too because of the interconnected supply chain, and all of those risks to normal consumption, no one is going to spend. The smart move is to keep your cash in a safe hedge against inflation, deflation, and otherwise. Why do you think Bitcoin and gold are both rising, they are both good hedges against the money printing spurring inflation which the average thinker believes will happen, but they are a good hedge against deflation too because they are more finite than dollars and are essentially a currency in and of themselves both historically and literally today. I mean 70% of the biggest e-commerce sites accept Bitcoin and other altcoins for purchases. A lot of international transactions when not payable in dollars are payable in gold. As the reserve currency of the day, the US dollar is probably the next safest currency aside from gold and Bitcoin to hold right now, but what if the Saudis stop pricing oil sales in US dollars? What happens to the dollar then. Hedging against that with gold or Bitcoin is a smart move right now, but it doesn't change the deflationary pressure on most of the stable world currencies. There is a reason Bitcoin has gone up $2400 in the last month and gold has gone up $200 an ounce in the last month while the dollar to euro conversion rate is essentially flat during the same period.
    1
  847. I live in NY-21, and I can tell you right now, that Ratigan wasn't even the best progressive in the race in NY-21. Katie Wilson is the real deal and is from the working class and in the working class. She earned $18K last year and has no assets. She garnered like 43 votes less than Ratigan for a 3rd place finish and if it were not for Ratigan's entry into the race and 2 wealthy well connected party insiders playing at faux progressives to split the vote, Katie Wilson would have beaten Tedra Cobb in a head to head match up. The crowded field sucked the oxygen out of the room. The only good thing about this race for the Democrats is that for the first time in 2 election cycles their candidate actually lives in the District, but Elise Stefanik will crush them. I say that as a person who worked on Congressional races in 2004, 2006, 2008, the 2009 special election which got the deciding vote on the ACA elected here when it was NY-23, and as a person who worked hard for the Green Party candidate here in 2016. This district might elect a progressive, but it would be a progressive Republican. This district with the exception of a brief period when Bill Owens was the Congressman from 2009-2015 has been Republican since before the Civil War, 1854 or 1856 to be precise. The first abolitionist Republicans were elected here. It was the home to John Brown, its where his grave is at. Teddy Roosevelt drew huge crowds in the district on his run for Governor and President from the back of a train giving speeches in small towns throughout the North Country. There are still progressive Republicans up here who will remind you that a Republican state Assembly, a Republican State Senate, and a Republican Governor, Nelson Rockefeller here in New York legalized abortion before the Roe decision legislatively and that the NY law was what Roe's decision was modeled on. There are progressive Republicans up here, but there are also Trump Republicans up here in droves too. It only takes 20,000 votes in a primary to beat Stefanik here though for a progressive, and that is an obtainable number for the grassroots. There is zero chance that a party that lost by almost 100,000 votes to the incumbent beats her here, sorry, not happening.
    1
  848. I agree, Serbia might get into fights with other countries because the Balkans always have had their ethnic beefs, but St. Lucia's neighbors are all mostly fellow Caricom members. The South and Central American countries all pretty much play nice with the islands. Cuba is a wild card potentially, bur mostly just helps other countries with Doctors since the Angolan involvement ended. Canada & Mexico leave most places alone. The EU is certainly pressuring every country to stop being tax havens, but the territorial tax in Gibraltar has gotten no guff even at 10% so St. Lucia's higher territorial tax definitely keeps them off the grey or blacklist. Most developing nations are potentially beneficiaries of China's Belt and Road policy, so if St. Lucia got on their radar it likely ends up being beneficial. For the most part the US takes advantage of the islands as tax havens and tourist destinations, but it is the only country that might bother St. Lucia realistically. It would be hard pressed to call a nation with no military a threat. Even if St. Lucia developed a set of Freeport policies that put it on par with Singapore and made it an attractive assembly point. If it then somehow used the freedom of movement under Caricom to expand it's workforce to rival Singapore which is a similar size land wise, the US would be hard pressed to sell a stable English speaking democracy with a common law system of justice integrated with a unified court for various British Overseas Territories and multiple other former British colonies that are now independent countries as a security threat. I mean if St. Lucia experienced a sudden and rapid economic growth out of nowhere to become the next Singapore and lifted much of the population of the Caricom states out of poverty in doing so, it still wouldn't be much of an economic rival for the US. It may be despised as an entry point for untaxed goods into the US market, or in this day and age more likely as a services empire, but it's not likely to be a home for companies the US or Europe would try to steal.
    1
  849.  @samjordan8800  I'm not saying a country should take the deal. I'm only saying that China's policies towards a country like St. Lucia are unlikely to be adversarial. Much like US and IMF lending it would be an enslavement policy, that is without question, but Singapore has certainly shown a way to navigate towards development without foreign entanglements even for a resource poor country. The straits of Malacca were a definite advantage, but being close to US, Mexican, Canadian, and South American markets and just far south enough in the Caribbean to have only been hit by 14 hurricanes since 1850 means St. Lucia which is the only CBI country to have retained a territorial tax system after the EU pressure with the blacklist & greylist means it is the one country that I could see using Freedom of Movement under Caricom to attract a workforce to grow into a Singapore through the proper use of tax and investment policies to attract foreign entrepreneurs. If St. Lucia adopted a Virtual Zone Enterprise policy like Georgia, and gave entrepreneurs a relatively inexpensive and renewable business visa/work permit less than the price of a Caymans or UAE work permit, and more than a Cambodian annual business visa, so well below the Cayman Islands fees of potentially tens of thousands of dollars and less than the $2k for a UAE freelancer visa, but more than the $300 for a Cambodian business visa, with an income & social security tax exclusion for key employees of a company with Virtual Zone status employed pursuant to a business visa/work permit for salary & wage income of up to the US foreign earned income exclusion plus the US standard deduction & maybe adopted a Singapore like remittance policy where any money in a Virtual Zone company with a non-exempt bank account was taxed at say 10.5% until 2025 and 13.5% after 2025 to avoid GILTI, I could see digital nomads flocking to St. Lucia to build the next major tech company. I mean it would be easy enough to do, set up a banking regulation for Virtual Zone companies that allowed them to make an exempt bank account election or a non-exempt bank account election when they open an account and you have the ultimate tax planning vehicle for digital nomads and digital expats. If St. Lucia also enacted a Free Industrial Zone Enterprise policy like Georgia or the UAE and offered reasonably priced annually renewable licenses for those companies to allow for duty free import, assembly, re-export, or for the provision of services from those zones it could attract a fair amount of investment as the Philippines have with similar free trade zones. When those free trade zones are coupled with a corporate tax exemption and salary exemptions for key personnel holding business visas/work permits if those fees are low enough St. Lucia will attract a lot of investment and entrepreneurs. They also wouldn't need to impose much of a tax rate because a lot of US companies and US investors would opt into the exempt/non-exempt tax regime with annual remittances to avoid GILTI. I mean 10.5% of five to ten multi-million dollar companies becomes a windfall for a country like St. Lucia. Especially if 5 or 10 thousand small entrepreneurs spend $1500 a year for a work-permit/business visa and maybe another $300 a year for a Virtual Zone Enterprise License for their company with a $500 annual corporate renewal. I mean $2300 a year in fees for a small company to avoid $20k a year in taxes is a pretty good deal for someone with a successful, but small blog for example. If they can set up that St. Lucia business with a visa and work permit that allows them to also get a tax residency certificate by staying in the country for at least one month a year, it becomes really valuable for not only US digital nomads, but also European, New Zealand, Canadian, and Australian digital nomads. St. Lucia, St. Kitts & Nevis, Dominica, Grenada, and Antigua and Barbuda could all supplement their CBI programs with this kind of regime. If they used a Singapore style rule to require a resident Secretary or a resident Director who must be present in the country for at least 183 days & if they implemented annual audit & reporting requirements like Singapore for these companies -even if they allowed for nominee resident directors or implemented minimal substance requirements like a registered office and a certain amount of spending as Malaysia has done for Labuan companies, these businesses would not run afoul of the EU substance requirements. Of course the annual licensing regime would probably provide an adequate substance in and of themselves. The policy should require a stringent KYC process for initial registration and renewal to confirm the identity of key shareholders and personnel too, but for start-ups on a budget the option of the key executive remaining in the jurisdiction on the work permit/business visa would meet most substance requirements.
    1
  850. 1
  851. 1
  852. 1
  853. 1
  854. 1
  855. 1
  856. 1
  857. 1
  858. 1
  859. dharma6529 hey dumbass he is blaming “elites” that is BOTH PARTIES, because they are both to blame. Who drafted NAFTA? George H. W. Bush. Who got NAFTA ratified? Bill Clinton with a Democratic Congress. Who enacted the repeal of the Glass-Steagal Act and the Commodities Futures Modernization Act. Well the primary author of the law and its champion in Congress was Texas Republican Senator Phill Gramm. That is why it was called the Gramm-Leach-Blilley Act as well. Who signed it into law, Bill Clinton a Democrat. Who gave the banks a bailout when exactly what North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan said would happen because of that bill which he opposed happened 8 years later? George W. Bush signed TARP into law. It was a bill authored by his Secretary of the Treasury and passed by a Democratic House and Senate with bipartisan support. Both parties are bought by the exact same people. Clinton had Goldman Sachs executives in his White House. Bush has Goldman Sachs executives in his White House. Obama had Goldman Sachs executives in his White House. Trump has Goldman Sachs executives in his White House. It doesn’t matter which fake corporate spokesperson from which team you put in the White House they are all owned by the exact same people and Trump is owned more than most because he OWES billions of dollars in commercial real estate development debts that can be called in at any time by creditors. He is on the shortest leash of anyone to ever hold the office and he has some people snowed into believing he is independent. He isn’t and neither was Obama or Clinton or Bush. The same people run all of them and I’ll give you a hint. They are a family of European bankers who own the Federal Reserve Bank which is about as Federal as Federal Express. Until you stop playing the left versus right paradigm and start playing the worker’s should own every penny of value that they create -because as Lincoln said -labor is superior to capital because until labor exists, no capital can be created as capital is the fruit of labor, until you start saying that workers should own where they work and control the way where they work operates by a majority consensus of the workers, you are playing the game that the wage slave master wants you to play. You are the obedient Uncle Tom house negro they want everyone to be. You sure as shit ain’t an American rebel.
    1
  860. 1
  861. 1
  862. 1
  863. 1
  864. 1
  865. 1
  866. 1
  867. 1
  868. 1
  869. 1
  870. 1
  871. 1
  872. 1
  873. Honestly as a guy there was never a better opportunity in life to find a high quality girlfriend or potential spouse than when I was in college as an undergrad and I went to two professional graduate programs after my undergrad degree. There were a few attractive women in those programs and there were exclusively smart women in those programs, but as a percentage attractive and smart was far more common at my undergrad institution, but my problem was I was working my ass off to afford school and get through school on time. I did not have time for a social life and definitely did not have this skills to have a social life. If I hit the lottery, other than paying off my debts, the first thing I would do is apply to get a second bachelor's degree. I enjoy learning new things, so if I had the money and time to do whatever I wanted, I would be a college student again, but the second time around I would make use of having a social life. Yeah, what they don't tell you is that getting even professional degree that give you careers which are supposed to pay better do not pay enough for the investment to be worth it for the vast majority of people working in those fields as licensed professionals. Really the US is designed to be a hamster wheel for most people. Playing a different game is probably your best bet, but this piece of advice should be heeded by young men and young women alike. Finding women smart enough for you is hard in many places. Attractive is kind of the easy part, even though it's a low percentage game. If you have one of those "great" professional careers, you are a catch in this country if you are even moderately good looking, but smart and sexy is rare amongst women. If you do come across that combination, most are taken, and if they are not taken, there is probably a reason for that fact.
    1
  874. 1
  875. 1
  876. 1
  877. 1
  878. 1
  879. 1
  880. 1
  881. keith mcdowell umm asshole did you get the memo in this video. Cars which are functionally designed to get people and things from point a to point b now kill less people in the USA annually than guns do. LESS!!! And with rare exception those injuries and deaths are accidental. By design, guns have one function and purpose to kill. That is their sole and exclusive use. Guns do not save lives ever! End of story. Guns take lives. Guns injure and maim tens of thousands more than they kill now too because doctors keep getting better at treating gunshot wounds. Cars on the other hand kill fewer and fewer people because by design they allow fewer and fewer people to be injured because of improved technology from seat belts, to airbags, to crumple zones, to lazer and radar guided computer assisted accident avoidance systems, and even simple innovations like anti-lock brakes and snow tires. Guns only get more deadly as a product in general with higher capacity magazine designs, larger caliber bullets, and such. The fact that doctors have gotten better at treating those severe injuries is a miracle. Has that contributed to improved auto accident survival rates too, yes, but not merely as much as improved safety technology on automobiles. Civilized societies should eliminate guns in the hands of their citizens and police and should never have a standing military, but most Americans are not civilized. The fact that you would say cars which keep getting safer and have non-lethal uses are more problematic than guns is enough evidence of that, especially when saying so in response to a video which demonstrates that cars were literally safer than guns last year is very telling.
    1
  882. 1
  883. 1
  884. 1
  885. 1
  886. 1
  887. 1
  888. 1
  889. 1
  890. 1
  891. 1
  892. 1
  893. 1
  894. 1
  895. 1
  896. 1
  897. 1
  898. 1
  899. 1
  900. As someone who has lived 30 miles from the Canadian border in Upstate NY most of my life, although born in Tacoma, Washington & having lived for a brief time near Peoria, IL while my father was stationed in Germany & my mother was attending college while I was an infant. Whenever I have visited NYC it's subway was depressing in a way the DC subway was not, the Buffalo subway was not, and the Los Angeles subway was also not. I lived in Buffalo for 3 years during law school & while it has much of the rust belt decay, it never had the rampant garbage smell that is all over NYC. I lived in Los Angeles for a year and despite being the second largest city by population, it too even in it's worst neighborhoods did not have the trash and decay problem that is pervasive in NYC. Which is its own problem for Los Angeles. The bad neighborhoods and the good neighborhoods have few tell tail signs, but while NYC keeps you on guard even in the best neighborhoods, Los Angeles can lull you into an unhelpful calm even in the worst neighborhoods because they don't look that bad. Palm trees and sun make even sketchy neighborhoods look nice in ways that garbage and worn out subways do not. I will say I am happy that you are enjoying the experience of peace that comes from a more rural life. It has its own pitfalls certainly. It's hard to get the great variety of cuisine available in more urban areas. You will be hard pressed to attend a great Shakespeare play. The local high school football game is a poor substitute for the Giants or Jets game. The little league does not compare to the wonderful ball park in the Bronx, but you can Netflix and chill with the best of 'em in even the most rural parts of America these days.
    1
  901. 1
  902. 1
  903. 1
  904. 1
  905. 1
  906. 1
  907. 1
  908. 1
  909. 1
  910. 1
  911. 1
  912. 1
  913. 1
  914. 1
  915. 1
  916. 1
  917. 1
  918. 1
  919. 1
  920. 1
  921. 1
  922. 1
  923. 1
  924. 1
  925. 1
  926. 1
  927. 1
  928. 1
  929. 1
  930. 1
  931. 1
  932. 1
  933. 1
  934. 1
  935. 1
  936. 1
  937. 1
  938. 1
  939. 1
  940. 1
  941. 1
  942. 1
  943. 1
  944. 1
  945. 1
  946. 1
  947. 1
  948. 1
  949. 1
  950. 1
  951. 1
  952. 1
  953. 1
  954. 1
  955. 1
  956. 1
  957. 1
  958. 1
  959. 1
  960. 1
  961. 1
  962. 1
  963. 1
  964. 1
  965. 1
  966. 1
  967. 1
  968. 1
  969. 1
  970. 1
  971. 1
  972. h h the Koch’s are very different than Bezos or Gates or Zuckerberg because their business is a privately owned company whereas the others are publicly held. The paper value of Amazon, Microsoft, and Facebook is controlled by a heavily traded liquid market, whereas the value of Koch Industries is because of its physical assets and cash reserves, with some value added for its goodwill and its inherent value as a going concern. When it comes to Amazon or Microsoft or Facebook, their valuations are highly padded by the public market. Neither Amazon nor Facebook earns more than $30 billion per annum in profit, yet both have been valued well north of 15 or possibly as much as 30 times annual revenue or more. By contrast Koch Industries brings in about $100 billion per annum and is the second largest privately held company in the world and the brothers who until one of them’s recent demise who owned it each had a net worth of only about $50 billion each by their estimates. Realistically, most privately held companies have a market valuation of between 2 and 5 times annual earnings when sold. Amongst Koch Industries’ many holdings is included Georgia Pacific. That well known construction materials company alone was valued at over $13 billion by the publicly traded market when Koch purchased it and took the business private. North of 90% of Koch revenue is reinvested into the company and its growth annually via acquisitions and investments in new physical facilities and equipment. If Koch were a public company it is safe to say that the estate of the late David Koch and his brother’s fortune would both easily be valued at north of $500 billion as the company would easily be valued at in excess of $1 trillion in the public market.
    1
  973. Blue states typically pay more into the federal government in taxes than they get back and typically have a higher GDP workforce per capita. The highest per capita GDP is NY at about $95k followed by California and New Jersey. The blue states are the most productive and pay the most taxes. The "dependent" states with the highest percentage of poverty, lowest per capita GDP and highest instance of people on welfare are typically red states like Mississippi and Kentucky. The problem is that the hardest hit states are these highly productive states. When you shutter a company that makes $20 million a month and pays out $15 million a month in wages, that crushes the states income and sales tax base. I mean California and New York's payrolls from film and television production alone are probably higher than the GDP of Montana for example and those industries are shuttered. The sales and income tax revenue lost from that shuttering is crushing for municipal governments in those states not to mention the state government. A city in my region is asking it's workers to take a 15% paycut because of the loss of sales tax revenue. During the 2008 recession my friend who is a local government attorney in a county in Northern California had to take a 15% paycut and just got back to his 2005 salary from before the cut last year and the pay raises scheduled for the next 3 years would have brought them back to similar pay rates for other government lawyers in California. They are already talking about asking for another paycut there. He will literally have had no pay increase for 20 years in all likelihood before this is done.
    1
  974. 1
  975. 1
  976. 1
  977. 1
  978. 1
  979. 1
  980. 1
  981. 1
  982. 1
  983. 1
  984. 1
  985. 1
  986. 1
  987. 1
  988. 1
  989. 1
  990. 1
  991. 1
  992. 1
  993. 1
  994. 1
  995. 1
  996. 1
  997. 1
  998. 1
  999. 1
  1000. 1
  1001. 1
  1002. 1
  1003. 1
  1004. 1
  1005. 1
  1006. 1
  1007. 1
  1008. 1
  1009. 1
  1010. 1
  1011. 1
  1012. Haden Wilson I’m actually an attorney. I actually have helped manage Congressional campaigns and I’m actually familiar with the campaign finance laws and a) the Trump Organization -a corporation paid Cohen and had the expense invoiced as legal expenses which means it was both a tax fraud by Trump and his company, and a campaign finance violation as corporate payments and the payment by Cohen as an in-kind contribution were felonies in excess of the campaign limits, and Trump improperly credited the personal debt on his personal financial disclosures as the President. Your copy and paste analysis isn’t anywhere near as concise and reasoned as someone who actually deals with criminal work and has actually dealt with the campaign finance law and ethics rules for candidates and elected officials would do when analyzing the transactions. but thanks for pretending to know what you are talking about. How the transactions were structured matter in campaign finance law. Could Trump have legally paid the hush money? Yes. How? By paying corporate tax on the money then personal tax on the money and contributing it to the campaign as a candidate contribution and paying the payment and properly documenting and accounting for it in his disclosures -which would have defeated the purpose. You can’t make secret expenditures. You see, when you have more than a cursory understanding of the law and how it works, you understand that Trump was actually involved in a money laundering transaction, a tax fraud, and a campaign finance violation himself. Regardless of the source of funds, because he failed to disclose the expenditure. When you understand the if he were going to claim this was a personal expenditure and he simply paid Cohen a fee for handling a private matter paying it through a corporation and writing that off as a deductible business expense on his taxes was tax fraud. Also that failure to report the debt to Cohen on his Presidential financial disclosure statement, that was a crime. Trump admitted to committing multiple crimes during his television interview, but because he listens to “legal analysts” on Fox News who should be sanctioned for ethics violations for lying in their statements about the state of the law, he wasn’t even aware that he was making admissions of guilt during his television interview.
    1
  1013. 1
  1014. 1
  1015. 1
  1016. 1
  1017. 1
  1018. 1
  1019. 1
  1020. 1
  1021. 1
  1022. 1
  1023. 1
  1024. 1
  1025. 1
  1026. 1
  1027. 1
  1028. 1
  1029. 1
  1030. 1
  1031. 1
  1032. 1
  1033. 1
  1034. I can only tell you about the slow rolled re-opening by region here in NY. We have 7 criteria. 30 case tracers per 100k people -so we can do what South Korea has done with testing to slow the spread with follow up tests for those exposed and quarantining potentially infected individuals. 14 day average declining hospitalizations or 3 days with less than 15 new hospital admissions, 14 day average declining deaths or 3 days with less than 5 deaths total, an average infection rate per new case of less than 1.1, at least 30% available ICU bed capacity, at least 30% of all hospital beds available for COVID-19 patients, and at least 30 tests per month per thousand people available which in my region with about 700k people translates to 419 tests per day on average for 7 days to mean we have the testing capacity to do South Korean styled tracing and testing to prevent the spread. There are 4 of 10 regions in NY state that have met re-opening criteria. A fifth region is likely to meet the requirements tomorrow because they have ramped up testing which is the only thing they lacked. 4 out of 10 regions have met 5 of 7 criteria with hospitalizations and deaths being the area where they are lacking. For NYC region they have met only 4 of 7 criteria. These criteria being met after Friday will allow construction projects, curbside retail, wholesale sales, and manufacturing businesses and drive-in movie theaters to reopen for 2 weeks during phase 1 in a region. If any of those criteria fail, but particularly the case infection rate rising over 1.1 new cases for each person who tests positive, lockdown begins again. Phase 2 starts two weeks later if that first phase is successful. During phase 2 in office professional services like accountants and lawyers will be allowed to reopen. Phase 2 allows retail to reopen their stores for more than curbside pickup. It also reopens realtors, insurers, and administrative offices. A lot of small retailers are unlikely to reopen during this phase despite the go ahead because the costs of outsourcing a cleaning if there were a case in store would be prohibitively expensive as it will likely need to be outsourced. Professional services reopening in phase two in NY will likely include barbers and dentists too. Phase 3 will start two to four weeks after Phase 2 in NY regions and that will allow restaurants to reopen with social distancing rules, but it will also allow hotels to reopen gyms and pools, and in house dining and other common area facilities. While rooms have been available as essential services, most of these aspects of hotels have been closed. Phase 3 will allow public gyms to reopen. Phase 4 which will come two weeks to a month later will allow arts and entertainment venues and schools to re-open with distancing rules in place and all of this assumes masking which I don't understand how masks work in a bar or restaurant, I mean how do you eat through a mask, but anyway, big events and possibly big attractions like the state fair or a live concert or a major amusement park like Darien Lake or the Great Escape, the biggest amusement parks in the state are unlikely to be able to re-open unless the entire state has entered phase four. Now there are 7 counties in my region of the state and it is one of the regions that will be allowed to start phase 1 reopening on Saturday. It already is home to the largest single employer in the state the Fort Drum military base which employs more than 20k soldiers and civilians which has been open the entire time. The county with that base is my home county. It has had 68 total cases in the last two months with more than 110k residents. There are currently 3 active cases. The county next door with 26k people had 11 total cases in the last 2 months and is home to the largest farm in NY state which had remained open with several hundred employees and a Kraft plant where most of the Philadelphia Cream Cheese for the US market is made which has also remained open with several hundred employees. There is currently 1 active case in that county. The other county next door has 110k people and it's home to Alcoa's largest plant in the US which was essential and has remained open with a couple thousand employees. The region is also home to multiple paper mills which have been deemed essential and remained open throughout. There was a major outbreak in a nursing home in that county. About 185 total cases in that county and it has less than 30 active cases with the rest recovered. In these 3 of 7 counties only 2 people died during the last 2 months. The county with 185 cases was the worst of the seven. One of the seven counties only had 3 cases and it only has 4k people. No other county amongst the 7 had more than 70 cases total. Similar numbers are true for the Southern Tier region. There are bigger numbers in the Mohawk Valley region and Finger Lakes regions of the state which will also reopen, but only because Utica and Rochester are larger cities which out them at higher case counts, but still low per capita. The Central NY region which is also likely to be able to open on Saturday has higher numbers because of Syracuse and an outbreak amongst migrant workers at a large scale Greenhouse. This didn't happen at work, but rather because they were sleeping 4 to a motel room at 4 hotels in the area outside of their job. The cleanup for the hotels was exceptionally costly. I guess what I would say is that some states are taking a slow and cautious approach, but honestly, the numbers from Sweden which never shuttered tell me the entire exercise was a complete waste of effort. The death rate is marginally higher, but the infection rate is not overwhelming just by practicing distancing. If case tracing and follow-up testing is part of the re-opening regime, South Korea has shown that can be an effective way to stop the spread.
    1
  1035. 1
  1036. 1
  1037. 1
  1038. 1
  1039. 1
  1040. 1
  1041. When an ultra-high-net-worth individual says, “you can’t pay someone less than the market value of their labor” he is telling the truth, but he is leaving out an important fact about that market value. The anti-abolitionist’s most successful argument against freeing the slaves, the argument that meant Lincoln only earned 38% of the popular vote while winning a 4 way electoral college victory in 1860 was that freeing slaves to compete would drive wages down for industrial workers in the North! The reality is that paying no actual pay, but providing a roof over a slaves’ head, clothes on their back, and food in their bellies, even in the bondage slave system kept wage slaves wages high enough that they could earn a living that provided them with enough money for the basics of survival. The part of the equation that is being left out is that in a capitalist market economy as opposed to a slavocracy which valued slaves as property and kept them fed and housed and clothed as an investment. In the wage slave economy, the wage slave is disposable and replaceable. The value can be less than the cost of living. As employees are not balance sheet assets in the wage slave economy, actual bonded slavery was intrinsically better for more workers. I can make that argument about markets and the logic is not flawed. You know it, I know it, and that rich asshole knows it. Now a minimum wage law that is a living wage as Teddy Roosevelt a Republican first argued for in 1912 will provide a livelihood that is better than subsistence slavery and allows a worker to enjoy leisure time and have a life outside of work. What actual socialism -the workers owning and democratically controlling business enterprises and in certain situations of natural monopolies the consumers owning and democratically controlling the enterprise, when tried with the Mondragon cooperatives in Spain teaches us is that the poorest people can build real wealth and grow their economy through cooperatives which are true libertarian and democratic socialism those systems have only exclusively been used in an economy briefly in Catalonia in Spain during the Spanish Civil War and they were a success. Cuba is moving from state capitalism to this libertarian socialism as we speak and it seems to be working there too. The cooperative model has a 6x higher ten year survival rate than capitalist enterprise as well, so maybe we should actually try socialism which is not outside of a market, but is actually the only form of ownership in the free markets that will produce the best results. What this rich prick doesn’t know or understand or which he routinely lies about is refuted with hard data. Mondragon started with 6 worker owners in 1956 in the Basque region of Spain which was amongst the poorest parts of Europe. Today there are 120,000 worker owners at Mondragon with open membership to the workers after a probationary period that makes them owners of the business with one share that collects a patronage dividend based on their proportion of the total man hours of the profits and pays them a market salary and benefits. As worker owners they are outside the unemployment system and the disability system so they take care of themselves. They each get one vote in the management equal to all other workers. They on average have a net worth of $750k and the Basque region today is one of the wealthiest in Europe because of Mondragon which is I believe like the 6th largest employer in all of Europe or something like that.
    1
  1042. 1
  1043. 1
  1044. 1
  1045. 1
  1046. 1
  1047. 1
  1048. 1
  1049. 1
  1050. 1
  1051. 1
  1052. 1
  1053. 1
  1054. 1
  1055. 1
  1056. The problem the neoliberals in both parties are going to have is when the working class says, we want lower taxes, but we want equity. I mean wages are great, but if the John Deere workers had to take a pay cut to keep the company going in lean times, they should have been granted equity in the company for their sacrifice. There are people now who are pointing out equity grants should be part of all employment contracts and workers should participate in gains as they already suffer losses. The data bears out that workers having a legitimate ownership stake and control of a company improves the long term success of a company every examination of worker-owned cooperatives shows this. The problem the neoliberal authoritarian tax and spend left and the authoritarian borrow and spend right has is that workers actually understand now that Marx's idea about workers owning the means of production is very different than taxing success, now. Workers want their boats raised with success they don't want to be taxed and they don't want to be left holding the bag anymore without equity. The problem politicians in both political parties have is that workers regardless of which team's jersey they don are seeing that workers getting their own piece of a company and a say on the board of directors makes more economic sense than taxing success. Because every tax on success falls onto the backs of workers. Every tax on success is paid by people who do the actual work. People who don't work - be they wealthy passive investors who get tax breaks that workers pay for, or the non-working poor, whether due to disability or lack of necessary work or lack of needed skills because society doesn't provide adequate training and education, who get very limited welfare to act as the reserve army of the unemployed to hold as a threat to the livelihood of workers are benefiting from gains, but worker's piece of success is being taxed away. Workers are not getting their fair share and that seed change in thinking is coming quickly.
    1
  1057. 1
  1058. 1
  1059. 1
  1060. 1
  1061. 1
  1062. 1
  1063. 1
  1064. 1
  1065. 1
  1066. 1
  1067. 1
  1068. 1
  1069. 1
  1070. 1
  1071. 1
  1072. 1
  1073. 1
  1074. 1
  1075. 1
  1076. 1
  1077. 1
  1078. 1
  1079. 1
  1080. 1
  1081. 1
  1082. Georgia reopened restaurants and nobody came. What is more when the CEOs start running numbers and they find out that a ton of office workers were more productive at home, they won't be able to justify $100s of thousands of dollars a year in commercial rents and real estate expenses to their boards. When that happens the commerical office space market is going to crater. A large part of the workforce will work from home from here on out. That long term will kill the lunch business at a lot of restaurants. Office workers travel in packs to casual dining at lunch and fast feeders. The end of office life is going to kill that and a lot of restaurants will die because of it. This disruption will have long term impacts most people aren't thinking about. I mean what percentage of coders who will soon be telecommuting all of the time, or telemarketers who will work from home, or debt collectors who will work from home, or even secretaries who will work from home in the near future because companies will eliminate office expenses, are going to move from places like NYC and San Fran with high rents to West Podunk Nowhere when they can get 5x the space for 1/4 the price and their job no longer cares where they live? What percentage of them will make that move not only because it is cheaper, but because they do not want to be in a zone like a major city with it's risk factors in a future pandemic? A lot and that is going to deflate real estate prices in cities as much as the loss of commerical rents from offices and restaurants. When those workers leave it is going to crush retailers who are already hurting even more. The changes this will cause will be so massive most people haven't even begun to think about the rsl long term effects.
    1
  1083. 1
  1084. 1
  1085. 1
  1086. 1
  1087. 1
  1088. 1
  1089. 1
  1090. 1
  1091. 1
  1092. With the exception of Putin's decision to start a war that will inflate food prices because farmers in Ukraine will not be able to plant or harvest a significant percentage of the world grain harvest, politicians have virtually zero to do with inflation. Unless you are saying their failure to regulate price gouging by corporate players is incompetence? In a free market with very little regulation, businesses have decided to increase prices on staples because workers have decided they can earn as much working for themselves in the current environment as they made working at the low wage jobs they had before the pandemic, but what is more those workers decided a more diversified set of revenue streams made more sense than devoting their lives fo making other people's businesses successful. If anything competent politicians increased the rate of capitalism in the market and those buddy capitalists that competent politicians crested have made it more difficult for incumbent players to compete. The response of incumbent players to this threat to their hegemony, monopolies, and monopsonies in the market has been to raise prices to force workers to re-enter their controlled employment market, falsely blame workers who became capitalists for their woes by calling them lazy and blame increase labor costs -which are not true, as data has shown nominal real wage gains if any, for increased prices. The reality is incumbent corporations with waning sales increased prices to hide sluggish volume, but also because they misread the changes in the market. They assumed workers had downsized their lives, when many have been better off working for themselves and working in a diversified manner. Plenty of people who worked at a very low wage for someone else now have an online store that generates part of their income. They also have a small crypto mine in their home and trading portfolio that generates part of their income. They also DoorDash or Uber with their car from time to time. They realized that not working for someone else saved them $800 a month in child care, but that time at home with their kids also gave them time to start a YouTube Channel, Blog, or Podcast that not only replaced the income they used to earn at their old job, but meant they keep the $800 a month they used to spend because they went to an office. The miscalcution by incumbent players that they can outlast people who replaced their old income by raising their prices to pad their bottom line is what has caused "inflation." It has nothing to do with politicians and everything to do with market capitalism and more people figuring out how to be free.
    1
  1093. 1
  1094. 1
  1095. 1
  1096. 1
  1097. 1
  1098. 1
  1099. 1
  1100. 1
  1101. 1
  1102. 1
  1103. 1
  1104. 1
  1105. 1
  1106. 1
  1107. 1
  1108. 1
  1109. 1
  1110. 1
  1111. 1
  1112. 1
  1113. 1
  1114. 1
  1115. 1
  1116. 1
  1117. 1
  1118. 1
  1119. 1
  1120. 1
  1121. 1
  1122. 1
  1123. 1
  1124. 1
  1125. 1
  1126. 1
  1127. 1
  1128. 1
  1129. 1
  1130. 1
  1131. 1
  1132. 1
  1133. 1
  1134. 1
  1135. You can create all the money you want. If it isn't in the hands of consumers/workers ie purchasers, that money is not going to create new demand for products. The problem is that despite all of this money, the demand for everything from oil, to housing, to food, clothing, electronics and even films has dried up. That means we are overproducing. Milk isn't being dumped without cause, it is being dumped because there is no demand for milk or dairy products. Oil isn't filling storage tanks to capacity and filling tankers without port for no reason, it is happening because there is no demand. There are some supply shortages due to the illness, but they are the exception, not the rule. The reason people are protesting to reopen the economy is because a lot of small businesses that employ them will be gone if they are not reopened immediately, and even if they reopen a lot of them will still be gone within two weeks because consumers have no money, or if they do have money, they have no desire to put their health at risk to spend that money. Georgia reopened restaurants and nobody came. There will be plenty of people ready to go get s haircut because they really need one if they or a family member weren't able to cut their hair, but there are plenty of people who won't spend that money today when they don't know if they will have the rent, mortgage, or car payment tomorrow, let alone money for food. Even with unemployment. Even if they are actually employed in what should be a safe secure job, like a firefighter, or a cop, a prison guard, or a teacher, or even the fucking post office. The local city government is asking it's workforce to take a 15% paycut to avoid layoffs due to the loss of tax revenue. My friend who was a public defender took such a cut in the 2008 recession and he finally got back to his old wage last year and they voted in a new pay hike on their negotiated contact which over the next 5 years would bring them back to normal for lawyers in their region. That pay raise is gonna be gone and they are gonna get another cut and he is going to be back to the payrate where he started at 15 years ago. My sister is the only French teacher in her school district and she is worried that in addition to Chinese which is outsourced to BOCES a unified School resource for vocational and other education for multiple districts we have in NY, that because there are about 2/3 as many French students as Spanish that her job is going to go away because of the decline in state aid due to a lost of income and sales tax revenue. She just hopes it doesn't happen before November because in November she is supposed to be eligible for loan forgiveness. Despite paying her student loans for 12 years, the first two the loan forgiveness program wasn't made available to her, she owes as much as she borrowed still, which means she has been working for nearly free for 12 years. She has paid the interest and paid for the reliable car she needs to get back and forth to work. She has lived at our parents home because she can't afford her own place and if the loan forgiveness goes away, she is ready to riot because this system has screwed her over so badly. I mention that because this is why we have deflation. No one is going to spend anything with these daggers hanging over their heads. This means we have and will continue to have overproduction. Everyone was already overextended on credit BEFORE THIS HAPPENED. We had massive default rates on commercial mortgages, auto loans, student loans, mortgages, and credit cards. This has exacerbated defaults on small business loans, commercial mortgages, commercial rents, mortgages, rents, credit cards, student loans, and all debts. That means it doesn't matter how much money the Fed pumps into the banks, there are very few people, even those with strong balance sheets willing to take on new debts right now because we have an oversupply of most goods, commercial property, and housing in terms of the ability for that housing or commercial property to generate revenue anyway. The big problem in commercial real estate at least office space is going to be that a ton of companies as a result of this are going to examine the expense of commerical office space and conclude it is an expense to eliminate because their work force was as productive if not more productive from home. I mean would you spend $50k or more a month for office space, insurance, and utilities for that space when renting 3 servers in a data center and setting up a VPN for $600 a month allows your company's staff to work from home and make just as much money and do just as much work as it always has during this pandemic? Hell no, your board of directors won't allow you to waste money like that going forward. Commercial rents are gonna fall through the floor. That is not discounting for the loss of retailers that will be liquidated as a result of this shuttering. Are you really gonna risk your life to go to Best Buy for a USB charging cable for your phone when you can get one to your house tomorrow or the next day from Amazon even if those stores reopen tomorrow? Hell no, because you are rational. There were thousands of stores at risk of bankruptcy BEFORE this happened, they are not coming back from this mess. That is millions of jobs that will be lost. This is only going to accelerate R&D for trucking companies and car services looking to have self-driving fleets of vehicles. It is also going to lead to a massive migration of work from home office workers to rural America. Do you really want to live in a city which had a higher likelihood of contagion during this event, knowing that another one IS VERY LIKELY TOO HAPPEN SOON, because of the interconnected nature of the world economy today? The shocks this is going to cause to the system will be felt for at least two decades as the shakeout continues. Think about this too, I mean if you are making $40k, $50k, $200k living in San Francisco or New York City, or Chicago, or Austin and paying outrageous rents or a high mortgage and you can move to West Podunk Nowhere and buy a house for $150k two months ago, but buy it for $95k in six months following the coming foreclosure wave and your job is now entirely remote from home because the business has gotten rid of the commercial office expense, are you going to keep paying high rents when you can own a nice house in the middle of nowhere that puts you at lower risk of getting sick? Now discount for the people who have family in those small towns. Brain drain from rural America to the cities has been massive during the last two decades. This is going to change politics in a big way in the near future too as demographics are going to shift. Think about the knock on effect from millions of square feet of office space going vacant and office workers working from home will have on the restaurant business. Are you going to drive to McDonalds for lunch when you are working from home as an office worker and you can have a good meal in your kitchen? Are you going to go to the sit down restaurant with a bunch of co-workers you don't go into an office with anymore? No! Even if you don't discount the restaurant business for the illness, I've had 3 take out restaurant meals in the last month and a half and I usually have at least 3 meals a week at a restaurant or more, so they are crushed in general right now and one of those meals was an Easter dinner deal that the restaurant provided a prime rib meal to be cooked at home at a massive discount on acting a grocery because they had too much meat. Point being, the illness is going to crush restaurants for the next several months at least and the change from commerical office space to work from home is going to be permanent for a lot of businesses as a cost saving measure which will hurt restaurants even more. If movie theaters reopen they won't get new product until they can all reopen. Let's be honest, they are not going to reopen anytime soon. Even if they were to re-open I don't know that Hollywood will be producing content anytime soon because it is going to be hard to convince millionaire actors and directors to risk their lives to produce a movie. There will be a glut of animation because that can be made on home computers and via remote render farms in data centers with VPNs for studios and with voice actors recoding themselves on a computer in a closet turned into a vocal booth in their home, but there are not going to be a lot of live action films made in the next year or more unless it incorporates face masks and the current state of the world. There may be some TV shows like cop dramas that do that, but family sitcoms are out. Are you wearing a mask in your house with family? Hospital shows would be cool with masks always on the characters, but it will end all of the steamy love triangles. Anyway, the bigger point is that we are in massive oversupply mode and the dollar in hand is king right now. No one wants to borrow the money being printed. Cash is king and the dollar in your hand today will be worth what cost you $10 today in six months, so you are going to keep that dollar and make it go further tomorrow if you are smart.
    1
  1136. 1
  1137. 1
  1138. 1
  1139. 1
  1140. 1
  1141. 1
  1142. 1
  1143. 1
  1144. 1
  1145. 1
  1146. 1
  1147. 1
  1148. 1
  1149. Nothing is wrong with your accent Roman, but there is a twinge of Russian in your speech patterns that is the same little twinge that any non-native speaker has regardless of how long they have been a fluent English speaker. I mean Selma Hayek will always have a subtle Mexican accent, Arnold Schwartzenegger will always have a German accent, Ryan Reynolds always has a Canadian accent. I mean he is a native English speaker, but there are subtle things that native speakers will always hear no matter how long or how well someone speaks the language. I'm sure the same holds true when you hear a fluent non-native Russian speaker even one who has worked hard to perfect their accent. It's an indescribable thing that is just there. I mean your inflection has this subtle Slavic thing that is just there. Your pronunciation is perfect, but there is a weight and sort of heavy masculine deep thing in your voice that seems common amongst Slavic speakers who speak English regardless of how well or how long they speak it, or how much they work to have a neutral accent. It's just a thing that is there. It's not a problem though because like I pointed out with Ryan Reynolds, to most native English speakers even other native English speakers will always have their local accent or dialect show through in certain moments. I mean my understanding is that Arnold Schwartzenegger's German accent when speaking his native language is kind of a countrified bumpkin sounding Austrian accent that would be reminiscent to certain strong Appalachian accents in the US which was so out of place that Arnold doesn't dub his own lines into German since the days of the original Terminator because it would be out of place. I would assume that different cities, Russian provinces, and also countries that made up the former Soviet Union all have their own accent and dialect quirks that are obvious to you as a native Russian speaker. They aren't wrong, they are just there. I mean I would suspect that you would hear a different accent from a native Chinese or Japanese, or English speaker from Australia when they are speaking Russian which you could not help but hear. It's the same thing when you speak English for native English speakers. It's just a subtle thing that is definitely there.
    1
  1150. 1
  1151. 1
  1152. 1
  1153. 1
  1154. 1
  1155. 1
  1156. 1
  1157. 1
  1158. 1
  1159. 1
  1160. 1
  1161. 1
  1162. 1
  1163. 1
  1164. Jordan, I live in Northern NY, near Watertown which is now the binge drinking capital of the state -probably because the war machine through Fort Drum has degraded the community, but I digress, living in “real America” as the RepubliCONS call it, I can tell you that a new economic system and new ideas other than PILOTS and tax breaks for big corporations are wanted to help create jobs here in real America. People would like to get things like Medicare for All, tuition free and room and board and books free college like the Land Grant College Act and the WWII GI Bill provided, absent that, less taxes sounds good to people, so they vote RepubliCON. Give them a reason to vote and they do. With no money -less than $10k a GP candidate for Congress here got 12k votes in 2016 and almost 20k votes in an open seat race in 2014 with $38k that he raised with the help of his friend Ralph Nader who personally endorsed him. He drew more votes from Republicans than Democrats both times according to polling and the Democrats ran two corporate Democrats including a Pentagon and defense contractor shill in one of the races. The Democrats in NY-21 had a robust primary that Dylan Ratigan participated in and in my humble opinion as a Democrat who joined the Green Party the day after the NY Presidential Primary in 2016, the best candidate was a local working class single mom who came in second. There were three other progressives including Dylan who drew votes that would have otherwise likely went to her and the corporate Democrat in fake progressive clothing won and she is going to be handily defeated by the Republican incumbent because the Democrats didn’t run a candidate who full throatedly endorsed Medicare for All, and tuition free college and they don’t have a candidate who can explain an alternative system of economics that works for everyone. The GP in NY with Howie Hawkins has the best candidate remaining for Governor. He was a co-founder if the national Greens and is a walking encyclopedia of movement political history. The GP candidate for AG here in NY literally had a miniseries made by David Simon of The Wire fame about his most celebrated case. He as an NAACP attorney set the gold standard for housing desegregation with the Yonkers case. Michael Sussman without a doubt is the best lawyer in the field for AG. You should really interview them both because they will pick up the Nixon and Teachout torch and carry that message and politics in the right direction come November.
    1
  1165. 1
  1166. 1
  1167. 1
  1168. 1
  1169. 1
  1170. 1
  1171. 1
  1172. 1
  1173. 1
  1174. 1
  1175. 1
  1176. 1
  1177. 1
  1178. 1
  1179. 1
  1180. 1
  1181. 1
  1182. 1
  1183. 1
  1184. 1
  1185. 1
  1186. It takes a fundamental restructuring not only of how businesses function in terms of ownership and management, but also a fundamental restructuring of how power is wielded by a government. A Constitutional Direct Democracy with certain guarantees of rights, and certain imposition of general duties upon each individual citizen in terms of their contributions to society overall must be part of any fundamental restructuring. Private property must be abolished in land in favor of a community trust which holds title to the actual land. Buildings and improvements can be owned by an individual in either a life estate or fee simple, but there should be restrictions on the sale of buildings in terms of the appreciation in value of those properties as used in the Burlington Land Trust. There should also be a Medicare for All program that has a two-tiered savings account. Each individual must contribute 10% of their income to the savings accounts. One is the personal account which is drawn upon first. The second is the community account which is drawn upon second as an insurance pool to cover costs. Individuals should have the power to negotiate costs as happens in Singapore, and any amount left in the personal account following death should be heritable by the family members of the decedent, to encourage people economically to take the best care of themselves and be frugal in terms of their health care expenses, but there should be a societal insurance pool that covers all excess costs if someone is not able to fully fund their healthcare costs. This is different than the Singapore scheme. The same funding system should be put in place for a lifetime learning and educational fund, but that fund should impose additional contribution requirements upon the parents of children during the children's minority. This encourages better family planning because of the reduction in spendable income due to the additional forced savings for each child. Education should be provided so long as someone is enrolled in a proper institution without charge, but individuals should be able to negotiate costs in a similar manner with the medical account to keep costs low. A similar funding system should be set up for a Social Security for All account which would replace unemployment insurance, and welfare programs, but also provide as it does now, retirement savings, and disability insurance, but it should in fact provide a minimum basic income which can be utilized during times of economic weakness at a cooperative business or during a period of self-employment or partnership employment for up to five years, with additional extensions available if a minimum number of users per employee are using the services of the business in question as a subsidy to socially valuable enterprises that may not be as valuable to the general market. Users in this instance would contribute to the employees MBI from their personal savings accounts. These accounts would of course all be heritable following a citizen's death by their heirs. The payments would be made into the respective personal accounts of the individuals, however, 50% would also go to the community accounts. Between those 3 obligations which provide for the payment of individual rights to education, healthcare, and a minimum sustainable income, including housing, food, and clothing, about 27% of an individual's income would be paid into savings, with 13% paid into individual accounts, and 14% paid into the community accounts. How would the direct democracy work in such a system? Every 150 individuals would constitute an election precinct, and each precinct would have a local board with 7 members. These members would serve 6 month terms on the precinct board. The Board's meetings would be open to the public for all members of the precinct. The members would be chosen by sortition as members of juries are now. Every 11 years, every member of a precinct would serve on the board. There would be exceptions for mentally incapacitated citizens, and infants who had not attained the age of majority, and those with physical disabilities for whom service would be a hardship could opt out as often happens in jury duty, but basically everyone would participate in a precinct board. The precinct boards would propose all laws and budgets for the precinct, the towns or villages where they are located, as well as the counties, states, and the federal government. All rules would begin locally with a precinct board proposing them. Every 67 precincts would be organized into a representative district of about 10,000 members. When the majority of the precincts of a district propose legislation or a budget for a larger jurisdiction, be it a village, city, town, county, state or the federal government, all Districts composing such jurisdiction would be presented with the rule to vote on it. Votes would be by the citizens whenever a proposed precinct rule or budget is adopted. Executive positions would be upon appointment by a majority of the precinct as chosen by the precinct boards for each jurisdiction, but most of those positions would be civil service positions which are based on testing, with only the highest echelons by appointment. Judges would be chosen by sortition from members of the bar for the state and jurisdiction wherein the court is set, and those judges would be subject to the same appellate court system as is set up now, but the terms would be for a fixed period of years, say 5 and most attorneys would return to practice after a period on the bench, which would mean those attorney judges would want to maintain stare decisis to make sure that cased they handle later conform with existing rules, so that laws remain relatively fixed. The appeals process would have oversight by the precinct boards with a separate review that allows for the precinct boards to propose a change in the law by appointing alternate panels of appellate judges who could draft alternative decisions to be approved by the precinct boards for the appropriate jurisdiction and the citizens with an instant runoff aka ranked choice voting scenario. These changes would only be for new cases going forward in terms of a change in the law, and not an ex post facto change to existing law, although the boards and the people can pardon people through this process when justice demands it. Juries in this system would have the right to nullify or pardon a crime when it deemed that in an instance a law was unjust, and when a jury votes to nullify, a similar change in law procedure would begin at the precinct level for that jurisdiction. Of course wage slavery would be outlawed in this system, and only sole proprietorships with one employee owner, partnerships with employee owners and or retired employee owners, worker cooperatives, hybrid consumer/worker cooperatives, not-for-profits with open membership, and government agencies would be able to employ people in such a system to ensure that capitalism and dictatorial economics is eradicated. This system would vest duties of carefully crafting laws and budgets in the hands of the precinct boards, but thoroughly engage the public in their democracy with the open board meetings. These precinct boards would communicate with the other precincts in their district and the districts would communicate with other districts in their city, village, town, county, or state in regards to those jurisdictions needs, but also all other districts in terms of federal needs, but most control would be local and vested ultimately in the voters who would cast ranked choice votes on various legislation, including a none of the above choice when legislation is not appropriate, but also in terms of budgets and priorities such as that these boards would function much like local school boards do in many places today, with voters ultimately approving what the boards propose. Power is ultimately with the voters, but there is still representation, only everyone is represented by regularly participating in the board. The average adult would serve 5 to 7 terms on the board during their life for 2.5 to 3.5 years total, one night per week for there 6 month term. This dispersed power would mean in a precinct of only 150 people that most members of the precinct would know at least one of the seven members of their precinct board personally at all times, and with the board's meetings open to the public, democratic participation in the process would increase, but more importantly, laws would probably be relatively fixed, and regulations would usually be limited because it takes a long time and a fair amount of effort to get the majority of the precincts in a district to act to begin the process of changing the law.
    1
  1187. 1
  1188. 1
  1189. 1
  1190. 1
  1191. 1
  1192. 1
  1193. If he doesn’t want to take away everybody’s incentive then he should support true socialism which outlaws wage slavery and requires that the ownership and management of all businesses be on the basis of one worker, one vote, one equal share of the surplus AKA the profits in proportion to each worker’s percentage of the total man hours for the given measuring period of the surplus. In such a system there would of course be wage and salary variation to reflect variations in knowledge, skills, abilities, and the inherent risks of any given work activity, but that true socialism takes away no incentive whatsoever. In fact it provides a greater incentive to work smarter and harder and be more productive because you will directly benefit 100% from your increased productivity or a change in how things are done that increases the overall productivity of the business you work at daily. Does the right wing want us to start talking about real socialism, because I would love to talk about real socialism. I really want them to justify someone who does not work benefiting from people who do work in a system where the workers own the businesses and only the workers. Versus the system we have now where people like Donnie Boy and the Walton kids who have never done an honest day of work in their lives benefiting from the sweat off other’s brows, and then not only do the workers have to pay for those lazy rich bastards, they also have to pay for all of the other workers those rich bastards keep perpetually unemployed by hoarding wealth and demanding more work from less people for longer hours and lower pay. In a true socialist system if the workers can turn out 2x the goods or services in half the time, they will work half as much and may hire an equal number of people to work the other half of the day to produce 4x as much if there is a demand. Why? Because they will still make more by hiring more workers and work less and that is what most workers want. More free time and more money. If worker owners can accomplish that they will.
    1
  1194. 1
  1195. 1
  1196. 1
  1197. 1
  1198. 1
  1199. 1
  1200. 1
  1201. 1
  1202. 1
  1203. 1
  1204. 1
  1205. 1
  1206. 1
  1207. 1
  1208. 1
  1209. 1
  1210. 1
  1211. Win1@atime Howie Hawkins co-founded the Green Party USA in 1984. In the 1970s he and Sanders worked together to build the Liberty Union Party in Vermont. Howie was the first to propose a Green New Deal when he ran for NY Governor in 2010. Hawkins Green New Deal fundamentally shifts the structure of ownership of the enterprise in the USA. First it converts all utilities to consumer/worker owned cooperatives. Second it provides government grants to retrofit homes and commercial buildings for energy efficiency with better insulation, doors, windows, and efficient lighting, geothermal and solar thermal heating and hot water, as well as converting the energy grid to renewable resources. The Hawkins Green New Deal also provides contract incentives for worker owned cooperatives to get these grant based contracts with bidding advantages for All grant and general government contracts. This will include contracts for the manufacture of solar panels, batteries, and wind turbines, as well as research and development for clean energy fusion technologies and the like. Hawkins Green New Deal provides incentives for manufacturers of public transportation and commercial vehicles to utilize worker owned cooperatives in the supply chain as manufacturers. The same Hawkins Green New Deal supports a federal jobs guarantee that will fill many of those jobs by funding the creation of worker owned cooperative enterprise to rebuild infrastructure. The Hawkins National Health Service plan is superior to Medicare for All in that it will nationalize the pharmaceutical industry, we already pay for 98% of primary medical research through the CDC and the NIH, so why are we subsidizing corporations, and reorganize them as consumer/worker owned cooperatives with consumers having co-equal voting power with the workers who manufacture the medicines. It will nationalize hospitals and reorganize them as worker/consumer owned cooperative enterprises as well. Hawkins’ plans fundamentally reshape America into a worker owned democracy and that is what I support more than anything else. The collateral benefits of his plans are a much cleaner environment, a healthcare system that cares for everyone. And a much more productive and efficient society where the workers own the means of production and control the economy.
    1
  1212. 1
  1213. 1
  1214. 1
  1215. 1
  1216. 1
  1217. 1
  1218. 1
  1219. 1
  1220. 1
  1221. 1
  1222. 1
  1223. FACT: These not so bright women believe liars that are not making anywhere near as much as they believe them to be making A) because they assume they are making it, or B) the guys lie and say they are making it and these naive women believe them. I think A) is the more likely scenario. I think they assume a lot of facts not in evidence. 70% of men will never earn $100k in a year, that is why that number is being chosen. As many very wealthy people tell you getting to $100k a year in earnings is the hardest step. Getting to $1 million in assets is the next hardest step. They all say it is easier to go from $1 million to $10 million than it is to get to $100k a year or $1 million in assets. They all say it is easier to get from $10 million to $100 million than it is to get to that $100k? Why? Your leverage route have changed. You have a lot more leverage to take advantage of once you hit $1 million in assets. Even if you had won the recent $750 million Powerball or $1 billion MegaMillions lottery jackpot and had to split it two ways, after paying the tax bill, if you want to keep the money growing and are reinvesting 75% of the dividend and interest income left as Shaq of all people recommends, you would be hard pressed to have $500k a year in spendable money. I point this out to explain how extravagant the lifestyle these women want really is because at $500k a year you are not flying in private jets. You may have more than one home, but you will be spending a fair percentage of that spendable income on maintaining two upscale homes. I mean a 7 bedroom house as the one women described, even in a relatively inexpensive country overseas, at least one with good infrastructure and a favorable tax rate at the low end will cost $3-5 million to purchase and at the high end will be upwards of $40-$50 million to purchase. I mean a 7 bedroom villa or penthouse in Monaco will cost you, a 7 bedroom villa in the Bahamas or Cayman Islands will cost you, a seven bedroom villa in Dubai would cost you. Even a seven bedroom penthouse in a place like BGC Manila is going to cost a few million dollars. A seven bedroom mansion because 7 bedrooms is a mansion, in a podunk town in even a state like Tennessee or Georgia is at a minimum going to cost $3 million. It is going to cost you even more to maintain than a more expensive place in Dubai, Monaco, or Cayman would cost you because of property taxes you would not be paying, insurance costs, and pricier staffing costs for gardeners and maids. The point is even mega jackpot lottery winners would have trouble keeping up with these expectations.
    1
  1224. 1
  1225. 1
  1226. 1
  1227. 1
  1228. 1
  1229. 1
  1230. 1
  1231. 1
  1232. 1
  1233. Free public colleges and universities was so impossible that from 1862 when President Lincoln signed the Morrill Act AKA the Land Grant College Act into law until 1963 when Nelson Rockefeller a billionaire who inherited his wealth ended the practice as Governor of New York it was the norm in America and it wasn't until 1982 that California became the last public university system in America to do away with tuition-free public colleges and universities. It is so unaffordable that when the GAO tracked every dollar spent on the GI Bill following World War II where it even paid for books and room and board in addition to tuition, that the program returned $7 to the treasury for every dollar spent and created an additional $21 in GDP for every dollar spent. In fact, the vast majority of wealth creation in the US from 1862 to about 1978 can be tracked back to public education spending. When the US changed that policy in the 1980s for good and lowered the taxes on the wealthy at the urging of this idiot Laffer, the country went from $1 Trillion in debt to $22 Trillion in debt and over that period of time the Top 1% became $21 trillion richer while the bottom 90% of Americans LOST $900 billion in wealth. Reaganomics were so bad that there literally has been a $900 billion contraction of wealth in America once you offest the gains of the wealthy by their theft of the national treasury with the $21 Trillion national debt increase. The economics are simple. Investing in your people provides the greatest economic return. Not taxing the wealthy and corporations leads to a mountain of unnecessary debt and contracts your real economy. How else do you explain the deindustrialization of the United States of America over the last 40 years?
    1
  1234. 1
  1235. 1
  1236. 1
  1237. 1
  1238. 1
  1239. 1
  1240. 1
  1241. 1
  1242. 1
  1243. 1
  1244. 1
  1245. 1
  1246. 1
  1247. 1
  1248. 1
  1249. 1
  1250. 1
  1251. 1
  1252. 1
  1253. 1
  1254. 1
  1255. 1
  1256. 1
  1257. 1
  1258. 1
  1259. 1
  1260. 1
  1261. 1
  1262. 1
  1263. 1
  1264. 1
  1265. 1
  1266. 1
  1267. 1
  1268. 1
  1269. 1
  1270. 1
  1271. 1
  1272. 1
  1273. 1
  1274. 1
  1275. 1
  1276. 1
  1277. 1
  1278. 1
  1279. 1
  1280. 1
  1281. 1
  1282. I think how you get to a socialist economy that is functional is via a libertarian socialism coupled with social democracy that does impose community or consumer ownership of utilities and banking, that allows the sole proprietorship to continue, but which through tax policy, regulation, incentives and a change in the corporate law converts capitalist corporations to worker and consumer or hybrid cooperatives. This would mean that LLCs and business corporations would be outlawed as a business entity, but cooperative corporations and sole proprietorships or partnerships with UNLIMITED LIABILITY would continue. This would be a market economy and it would have social democracy with public schools and universities. It would also have universal healthcare coverage, but delivered by doctor, nurse and other medical professional owned cooperatives and consumer owned cooperative hospitals. I think that Cuba is attempting to transition from the state capitalism of its previous period to this kind of worker owned open market cooperative economy today from what I understand. In America, I think this would require a period of enhanced social democracy. With a lot of local efforts to build up cooperative businesses along the lines f the Cleveland model and a lot of focus on building publicly owned state banks and a drive to build out more consumer owned credit unions as well before a serious effort at converting the economy could begin in earnest. It would probably take half a century or more to set up the transition period.
    1
  1283. 1
  1284. 1
  1285. 1
  1286. 1
  1287. 1
  1288. 1
  1289. 1
  1290. 1
  1291. 1
  1292. 1
  1293. 1
  1294. 1
  1295. Christian Vennemann it makes total sense in a safe state to vote Green regardless of who the nominee of the Democratic Party is precisely to tell the Democratic Party and the nominee that its corruption is unacceptable, but also to help get the Greens to 5% of the vote specifically to get them General Election matching funds so that an alternative to the corrupt Democrats can continue to grow. It seems pretty obvious that the Justice Democrat’s route of trying to reform a corrupt party is not working. Even in New York that resulted in only 2 State Senate seats and 1 CD changing hands and NY has districts that are 85-95% Democratic. It resulted in ZERO US Senate wins. And less than a half dozen House seats overall and they had literally hundreds of candidates running. In my CD 10 candidates ran and the Justice Democrat’s ran a corporate party insider. Dylan Ratigan also ran. A local working class woman ran and was advised by a Green Party candidate who had garnered 11% of the vote in this very Republican district in 2014 to run as a Green. She didn’t. She came in second ahead of Ratigan. The Justice Democrat who has been a staffer for a corporatist State Assembly member came in fourth behind Ratigan and the winner was a former county legislator who was a long time DNC insider. Her campaign manager was literally the former State Party Chair who cast NY’s delegates for Clinton in 2016. The Republican incumbent trounced her by 70k votes. The Green Party candidate who did run was not nearly as strong as the 2014 candidate and picked up about 3k votes. Mind you in 2012 when the Greens ran, the Democrats were able to win the seat against the Republicans. This district is literally the district which in a 2009 special election voted in the deciding vote on the ACA. The Democrat from the district’s first vote in the House was the ACA, and he was the vote that put it over the top. When that Democratic incumbent retired in 2014 even if the Democrats had the 11% the Greens garnered they would have still lost by more than 10k votes. That being said for a midterm that race with our Green Party candidate increased voter participation in the CD by 5% and according to polling he took more Republican votes than Democratic votes in fact he took more Republican votes than either Democratic or independent.
    1
  1296. 1
  1297. 1
  1298. 1
  1299. 1
  1300. 1
  1301. 1
  1302. 1
  1303. 1
  1304. 1
  1305. 1
  1306. 1
  1307. 1
  1308. 1
  1309. 1
  1310. 1
  1311. 1
  1312. 1
  1313. 1
  1314. 1
  1315. 1
  1316. 1
  1317. 1
  1318. 1
  1319. 1
  1320. 1
  1321. 1
  1322. 1
  1323. 1
  1324. 1
  1325. 1
  1326. 1
  1327. 1
  1328. 1
  1329. 1
  1330. 1
  1331. 1
  1332. 1
  1333. 1
  1334. 1
  1335. 1
  1336. 1
  1337. 1
  1338. 1
  1339. 1
  1340. 1
  1341. 1
  1342. 1
  1343. 1
  1344. 1
  1345. 1
  1346. 1
  1347. 1
  1348. 1
  1349. 1
  1350. 1
  1351. 1
  1352. 1
  1353. 1
  1354. 1
  1355. 1
  1356. 1
  1357. 1
  1358. 1
  1359. 1
  1360. 1
  1361. 1
  1362. 1
  1363. 1
  1364. 1
  1365. 1
  1366. 1
  1367. 1
  1368. 1
  1369. 1
  1370. 1
  1371. 1
  1372. 1
  1373. 1
  1374. A guy who pushed papers and presses buttons and makes money by robbing workers and investors’ perspective on a work day is nothing like a guy who lumps furniture for a living. When I was in college I worked a summer job with a guy in his late 50s who was moving furniture and a guy in his early 70s who was still moving furniture. They are both dead. Neither of them ever retired. My father died 3 months shy of age 64. He worked up until he got cancer. He started working when he was 12. He earned a military retirement he never collected which my mother gets. He earned a federal civilian employee retirement which he collected for about 10 years while he continued to work full time at another job. My dad was a mechanic most of his adulthood, but did construction and ran a hydro dam. That is actually tough work keeping ice out of the racks in the winter and keeping debris out of the dam. Also fixing part on in when needed is not easy. If that guy was out freezing his balls off chopping ice from a power dam at 63 he wouldn’t have wanted to keep working until he died. If he was lugging a baby grand piano up a flight is stairs with 6 other guys which the 70 something guy did with me more than 20 years ago he would not want to do that on a 90 degree day with 100% humidity either. The fact that those people who worked that hard are broke at the end of their lives and that rich prick wants to keep working and thinks it is great makes me understand the movie Falling Down a lot better than I did when I was a kid.
    1
  1375. 1
  1376. 1
  1377. 1
  1378. 1
  1379. 1
  1380. 1
  1381. 1
  1382. 1
  1383. 1
  1384. 1
  1385. 1
  1386. 1
  1387. 1
  1388. 1
  1389. 1
  1390. 1
  1391. 1
  1392. 1
  1393. 1
  1394. 1
  1395. I'm glad that during all of this my neighbors and I have not been building a fence, but well I take that back, we did put up a fence, around the garden we tilled and planted together to keep the critters out. Of course that fence is wire and steel post though. We also cleaned up each other's yards and helped put a new walkway in for one neighbor. I mean a koi pond that one neighbor hasn't had time to maintain since the family member who maintained it died now has a nice lawn they can maintain in its place thanks to the work we've done to help each other. We will have carrots, potatoes, beans, radishes and plenty of other veggies thanks to that garden. We should have enough potatoes to keep a lot of us fed all winter even if things get worse and there should be enough beans to give us all a lot of meals too. Oh, and here in Upstate NY we have a fairly big logging community -my uncle was a logger and a couple of my father's friends owned substantial logging companies. We have a lumber Mill here too that is locally owned. It has been idle since March and it has the same product sitting in it's yard that hasn't moved. There may be price demand, but the genuine demand isn't enough for the local Mill owners to re-open and this is a mill that has always paid minimum wage. My cousin's neighbor had worked at that Mill for years making peanuts and when he finally found a better job it was one of the happiest days of his life. What I am telling you is you have called this correctly sir. It is entirely market manipulation and it is worse than that because they won't pay what they are getting for their futures contracts to the actual suppliers.
    1
  1396. 1
  1397. 1
  1398. 1
  1399. 1
  1400. 1
  1401. 1
  1402. 1
  1403. 1
  1404. 1
  1405. 1
  1406. 1
  1407. 1
  1408. 1
  1409. 1
  1410. 1
  1411. 1
  1412. 1
  1413. 1
  1414. Look at 2008 primary turnout of McCain, Obama, and Clinton in Obama to Trump counties in the rust belt. Look at Clinton, Sanders and Trump turnout in those same counties. Look at Obama general election numbers in those counties in 2008 and 2012 then look at Trump turnout in those counties in the general in 2016. Trump got McCain numbers in the primary and the general. Clinton did better in every county in the primary in 2008 than in 2016, but the 2016 primary turnout was typically HIGHER! In the nation as a whole overall turnout was higher in 2016 than prior elections hence Clinton getting 3 million more votes than Trump. In Obama to Trump counties Trump typically got the same numbers as McCain in the general from 2008, but Clinton got several thousand votes less than Obama in 2008 or 2012. In most of those counties not only did Sanders win the primary, he got more votes than either Clinton or Obama did in those counties in the 2008 primary. More of the Sanders voters from the primary turned out and voted Clinton than Clinton voters from 2008 did for Obama. We know that from exit polling. Who did not turn out in those counties were independents who had voted for Obama who were excited by Sanders or at least whom one could safely assume were excited by Sanders based on his numbers versus Obama's numbers in the primaries in those counties. Oh and the census data shows population in most of those counties was essentially flat. Demographically they were the same. That is why Trump got virtually identical numbers to McCain in both the primary and the general. Sanders independents stayed home in the Obama to Trump swing counties in the rust belt which decided the election. They would vote for Bernie. What is more, state specific polls from 2016 to today show that Bernie Sanders expands the map versus Trump. Utah in multiple polls favors Bernie over Trump. Texas in multiple polls goes to Bernie over Trump. Arizona goes Bernie over Trump. The great plains states are purple in a Bernie vs Trump race.
    1
  1415. 1
  1416. 1
  1417. 1
  1418. 1
  1419. 1
  1420. 1
  1421. 1
  1422. 1
  1423. 1
  1424. 1
  1425. 1
  1426. 1
  1427. 1
  1428. 1
  1429. 1
  1430. 1
  1431. 1
  1432. 1
  1433. 1
  1434. 1
  1435. 1
  1436. 1
  1437. 1
  1438. 1
  1439. 1
  1440. 1
  1441. 1
  1442. 1
  1443. 1
  1444. 1
  1445. 1
  1446. 1
  1447. 1
  1448. 1
  1449. 1
  1450. 1
  1451. 1
  1452. 1
  1453. 1
  1454. 1
  1455. 1
  1456. 1
  1457. 1
  1458.  charmander  I live right next door to an Obama to Trump county in the rust belt. It swung 9 points. In 2016 during the primary Sanders got 2k more votes than Trump and 2k more votes than Clinton. Obama got 3k more votes in 2012 and 5k more votes in 2008 than Trump got in 2016. In 2008 Obama got 4k LESS votes than Clinton in that same county during the primary and 3k less votes than McCain during the primary.. By the way that county LITERALLY is the reason Obamacare is the law. It's vote totals during the 2009 special election that installed the member of the House who was the deciding vote - the day after his election the ACA passed the House by his vote- was more than half of the first Democrat to win that district since 1854's margin of victory. In other words that county is a damn good bellwether and it matches Ohio, PA, MI, and WI Obama to Trump counties demographically. The landslide would not just be the 3 million more votes that Clinton got with Bernie, but the several million voters who cast ballots for Obama that stayed home. Oh and by the way, that county I described had only about a 500 person difference in population during that 8 year period and is flat in the last four years population wise. And Clinton primary voters in 2008 were 1/2 as likely to have voted for Obama as Sanders voters were to have voted for Clinton. In other words, independent Obama voters who voted in the 2008 and 2012 general election stayed home in 2016, but the enthusiasm difference in the primary results between 2008 and 2016 is pretty obvious why they stayed home. Those independents who could not vote in the state's closed primary -the most closed primary in the nation by the way, wanted Sanders! Oh and the Republicans have a slight registration advantage in that county, but it is fairly evenly matched.
    1
  1459. 1
  1460. 1
  1461. 1
  1462. 1
  1463. 1
  1464. 1
  1465. 1
  1466. 1
  1467. 1
  1468. 1
  1469. 1
  1470. The REASON behind Brexit at the high levels of the British aristocracy, the REASON the various British Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories by and large have remained zero tax, hell even the reason that certain former British Territories became independent countries that provide Citizenship By Investment by and large is to continue to make the City of London one of the most important financial centers in the world. Even in a world of Ultimate Beneficial Owners being named on the registries of companies so long you can pool your investments with five buddies and put a trustworthy lawyer who will maintain your confidences in charge of your company, ie keep each ownership below a 25% stake at say 20%, you can keep your name off of any registry. You can do the same with an offshore trust owning that piece of company and that is how despite the new banking rules exposing ownership and other rules exposing ownership, the people who value privacy, and the people who want to avoid taxes legally in certain high tax jurisdictions, as well as a few who want to evade those taxes, and the element involved in activities where money needs to be cleaned will continue to rely on the UK and the US to protect their money. I mean a US LLC owned by a BVI company is a pretty good privacy shield and it lets you park your Yuan which have been paid to another party in China who has a lot of Mexican Cartel dollars for sale in the US purchase a bunch of nice properties in California to keep your wealth outside of China despite transfer controls.
    1
  1471. 1
  1472. 1
  1473. I think Ecuador is a very interesting place because it has the potential to work very well for both low income earners & high income earners. It has a lot of interesting routes to residency & can provide a relatively quick path to citizenship for someone who wants to live there & it provides a Tier C passport with visa-free access to countries that are complimentary to most Tier A passports & many Tier B passports. It also gives Mercursor access to most of South America in the event you decided to move later & visa free access to Mexico which many Tier B passports not have. With the right EU residency permit it should make Shenzhen area travel fairly easy too, potentially. Beyond the passport, it is a fairly off the radar country too. Add to that access to the mountains, the beach, some fairly metropolitan cities, & a short flight time to the US or Canada for American & Canadian expats who want to visit family or need to return for business & it has a lot to offer. The relatively inexpensive healthcare system is also useful for the lower income expat, especially those with chronic health issues that would be financially unsustainable in the US. I think when you apply the go where YOU are treated best philosophy as you often say, individual facts & circumstances matter, & Ecuador while not completely overlooked, is definitely a country that can suit a lot of people's needs. It definitely can be useful for anyone using the Trifecta approach with multiple homes as a base of operations, & while it will tax individual income worldwide for tax residents & while it has some specific exit requirements to end tax residency, it currently has no CFC rules which would be beneficial for the business owner with a foreign corporation who lives frugally & keeps most of their income within their growing company.
    1
  1474. 1
  1475. 1
  1476. 1
  1477. 1
  1478. 1
  1479. 1
  1480. 1
  1481. 1
  1482. 1
  1483. 1
  1484. 1
  1485. 1
  1486. 1
  1487. 1
  1488. 1
  1489.  Shadow Company 1984  I have never voted for a winner because I routinely vote for a minority position. I have been saying this for more than a decade. George Carlin said it loud. The people suck. which is why the best bet is to put yourself into a position where no one government or country has power over your travels, your place of residence, you control the jurisdiction & timing & amount of your taxation as much as possible, and you have your money kept in reasonably safe banking institutions in multiple jurisdictions. Why? Because only then are you free. If you are living in a country where you are a citizen, you are probably doing it wrong. If you are banking beyond an amount needed for routine expenses in a country where you live or maintain a home, you are probably doing it wrong. If you have a company registered to do business in a country where you live you are probably doing it wrong. if your company is managed from the country where it is registered & incorporated you are probably doing it wrong. If you are tax resident in a country with a worldwide personal income tax, you are definitely doing it wrong. If you are not practicing flag theory in this day & age & have not freed yourself from any nation, currently the USA & Eritrea, which practice citizenship based taxation, you are doing it wrong. Less than 1/1000th of the people on earth have truly freed themselves from the servitude most are held in by "citizenship," "residence," banking laws, tax laws & other conditions of servitude & fealty & until more people free themselves we are all going to remain enslaved for a very long time.
    1
  1490. 1
  1491. 1
  1492. 1
  1493. 1
  1494. 1
  1495. 1
  1496. 1
  1497. 1
  1498. 1
  1499. 1
  1500. 1
  1501. 1
  1502. 1
  1503. 1
  1504. 1
  1505. 1
  1506. 1
  1507. 1
  1508. 1
  1509. 1
  1510. 1
  1511. 1
  1512. 1
  1513. 1
  1514. 1
  1515. 1
  1516. 1
  1517. 1
  1518. 1
  1519. 1
  1520. 1
  1521. 1
  1522. 1
  1523. 1
  1524. 1
  1525. 1
  1526. 1
  1527. 1
  1528. 1
  1529. 1
  1530. 1
  1531. 1
  1532. 1
  1533. 1
  1534. 1
  1535. 1
  1536. 1
  1537. 1
  1538. 1
  1539. 1
  1540. 1
  1541. 1
  1542. 1
  1543. 1
  1544. 1
  1545. 1
  1546. 1
  1547. 1
  1548. 1
  1549. 1
  1550. 1
  1551. 1
  1552. 1
  1553. 1
  1554. 1
  1555. 1
  1556. 1
  1557. 1
  1558. 1
  1559. 1
  1560. 1
  1561. 1
  1562. 1
  1563. 1
  1564. 1
  1565. What this has demonstrated yet again is that in the US the game is rigged. A bank whose primary account holders are Ultra-High-Networth-Individuals, Venture Capital Funds, and start-ups funded by those financiers all of whom could have exercised reasonable caution to protect their working capital accounts by diversifying their deposits amongst multiple banks using what was formerly known as CDARS and is now IntraFI which let's one bank account act as the management account for multiple accounts at multiple banks providing FDIC insurance on deposits in excess of $250k by diversifying the banks the money is held in while providing the convenience of working as if it were a unified account. These same individuals could've also diversified cash equivalents into a brokerage account holding the cash in a money market account invested in short term treasuries - I mean the looming default risk from the not so bright members of Congress refusal to raise the debt limit aside, if US treasuries fail everyone will have bigger problems than a bank failure. What is more if their deposits exceeded the amount the FDIC could insure via the IntraFi Network, they could've purchased private deposit insurance as well, some companies with massive deposits did take these appropriately prudent steps to protect their cash holdings for Trust accounts. Now, as happened when small retail investors got a leg up on dumb insiders with the GameStop short squeeze, the system is moving to insulate dumb wealth from it's failure to protect itself at all times with rational actions to privately insure their cash holdings this time, while in the GameStop scenario the brokers simply forced their customers to sell to their preferred insider clients with no protection from the SEC for the small retail investor who had bested the Wall Street financiers at their own game. Depositors who are nothing more than ordinary creditors who would typically be wiped out in bankruptcy are being made whole on the backs of ordinary citizens who never get a bail out and always get handed the bill for the short comings of America's oligarchs. If that isn't a game more rigged than any casino, I don't know what a rigged game is then.
    1
  1566. 1
  1567. 1
  1568. 1
  1569. 1
  1570. 1
  1571. 1
  1572. 1
  1573. 1
  1574. 1
  1575. 1
  1576. 1
  1577. 1
  1578. 1
  1579. Kyle, you are forgetting one important factor. Iowa Caucuses and the 15% viability threshold. If Bernie is at 70% which he is realistically, then Tulsi and/or a Warren and/or a Yang come in at 15% each and the corporatists are blocked in most precincts of the caucus. Let's say Bernie is at 60% and a Tulsi or a Warren is at 20% and a Harris is at 5% while a Yang is at 11% and a Warren is at 4%, who do the Warren people go to? That's right, Yang, and Harris is blocked out. The corporatist's supporters go home or they join a Warren or a Yang or a Gabbard. Probably the corporatist who ends up viable is Warren, which is far too much to the left, but she is their poison pill. Gabbard is Bernie's blocking back because of her attacks on the Military Industrial Congressional Complex. Yang being on the debate stage with Social Security for All and being able to say it was an idea that Reagan's Chief economist Milton Friedman supported as a way to shrink the size of government and replace the safety nets with a much simpler to administer negative income tax is going to shake things up and make Bernie look like a centrist too. Basically things are shaping up for a perfect storm of a realignment of the party just like 1980 was a realignment of the Republicans. Trump is Jimmy Carter to Bernie's Reagan. The person who came up with that analogy is spot on. Beto raised $5K in the first 24 hours versus Bernie's $6 million in the first 24 hours. The corporatists are laughable. Nobody is buying the fauxgressives. People sure as hell ain't buying the corporatists this time around.
    1
  1580. 1
  1581. 1
  1582. 1
  1583. 1
  1584. 1
  1585. 1
  1586. 1
  1587. 1
  1588. 1
  1589. 1
  1590. 1
  1591. 1
  1592. 1
  1593. 1
  1594. 1
  1595. I think anyone who has a home who still has a job has already taken their house off the market. Anyone who has no job and has a house is probably trying to figure out how to keep it by renting out rooms or the whole house for part of the month on AirBNB or by just becoming a landlord and maybe becoming a van lifer. If I were on unemployment right now, I would be trading in my old car for an older van if I owned a house and I would move into the van and rent the house to keep the assets because this is not going to be a quick recovery. I would economize my life. I think this type of stuff is happening because there are plenty of rational economic actors. There are also plenty of people who are selling out of their houses already at whatever the market price is today to economize, but I would bet given the 2008 crisis that most of the people who own a house today are not amongst the unemployed. Most of today's home owner class are in essential jobs and/or government employees, or in positions that easily transitioned to work from home. There are not a lot of fast food workers who became unemployed, and there are not many of them who are homeowners. Those who are are the last to go as key managers. Same for groceries and Walmarts. Do you think the people working at Hot Topic own a house? Hell no, hell to the no. What percentage of wait staff at the Texas Roadhouse own a home, I would bet less than 10%. How about the ticket taker at your local theater? I would again bet less than 10%, maybe key managers in a chain, or someone whose spouse is the primary breadwinner who is still employed at an essential factory or as a trash man. The people who will be selling homes are the mom and pop landlords who bought too high, and the Wall Street investor class will gobble up those bargains they have been positioned to do so for a long time. I predict a housing contraction is more likely in this environment. Just my two cents, fiat. Rents will fall, but housing is going to be in short supply for buyers.
    1
  1596. 1
  1597. 1
  1598. 1
  1599. 1
  1600. 1
  1601. 1
  1602. 1
  1603. 1
  1604. 1
  1605. 1
  1606. 1