If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
If you are having difficulty logging in, please REFRESH the page and clear your browser cache and try again.
If you still can't get logged in, please try using Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, Firefox, Opera, or Safari to login. Also be sure you are using the latest version of your browser. Internet Explorer has not been updated in over seven years and will no longer work with the Forum software. Thanks
Note:*This list is based on*estimates for 2017 by*IMF?s World Economic Outlook Database, April 2017. Select data is from the*CIA World*Factbook. (Nominal GDP = gross domestic product, current prices, U.S. dollars, GDP per capita (PPP) = gross domestic product based on purchasing-power-parity (PPP) per capita, current international dollar, and GDP based on PPP = gross domestic product based on purchasing-power-parity (PPP) valuation of country GDP, current international dollar)"
You talk about tax havens. Would they exist but for government?
Are you sure that's what you mean?
Yes. I know of no individual, charity or corporation that is allowed to lay and collect taxes using force of arms. The use of tax havens exists because of a differential in the amount of money sundry governments take from producers, and the transparency required by the government.
Bitcoin is a "tax haven" because it allows no transparency, and evidently people will pay quite a lot for a store of value that is unfettered by government action. BTW, governments will never stand for this. South Korea announced regulations today.
Ah -- OK. I understand. Yes. Governments levy taxes, so without governments tax havens would not exist. That's true. It also has absolutely nothing to do with the point here. Does more for my point, actually. Capitalism was imagined and birthed in a period in which there were far fewer states. We have many more states now. Many of them too small and irrelevant to global trade, but able to carve out enough revenue to support themselves by facilitating the worst of capitalism. Tax havens, flags of convenience, secrecy jurisdictions, fake economic free zones that really serve as money-laundering fronts, etc. Cyprus, Singapore, Hong Kong, Dubai and others had no sovereignty when capitalism took hold. Swiss bank secrecy didn't come about until the 1920s or 1930s, once capital started to move more freely across borders. These jurisdictions and the banks they liccence are equally happy helping Apple or Pfizer take advantage of aggressive but legal tax planning or facilitating ISIS, Bashir Assad, Putin, and other massive challenges to the system itself. Marx knew what he was talking about when he said that capitalism would sell itself the noose by which it would hang. Like so many, he was much better at diagnosing than recommending a cure. History will probably prove him right on that.
Ah -- OK. I understand. Yes. Governments levy taxes, so without governments tax havens would not exist. That's true. It also has absolutely nothing to do with the point here.
It has everything to do with your point. To explain more fully, I'll mark your examples.
Capitalism was imagined and birthed in a period in which there were far fewer states. We have many more states now. Many of them too small and irrelevant to global trade, but able to carve out enough revenue to support themselves by facilitating the worst of capitalism. (1)Tax havens, (2)flags of convenience, (3)secrecy jurisdictions, (4)fake economic free zones that really serve as money-laundering fronts, etc. Cyprus, Singapore, Hong Kong, Dubai and others had no sovereignty when capitalism took hold. (5)Swiss bank secrecy didn't come about until the 1920s or 1930s, once capital started to move more freely across borders. These jurisdictions and the (6)banks they liccence are equally happy helping Apple or Pfizer take advantage of aggressive but legal tax planning or facilitating ISIS, Bashir Assad, Putin, and other massive challenges to the system itself. Marx knew what he was talking about when he said that capitalism would sell itself the noose by which it would hang. Like so many, he was much better at diagnosing than recommending a cure. History will probably prove him right on that.
Hack, what is bringing capitalism to the condition in which we find it in the US today is government. Adam Smith was a supporter of laissez-faire capitalism, which posits minimal functions for a national government
Laissez-faire, also called laissez-faire economics, a policy that advocates minimum interference by government in the economic affairs of individuals and society. Read more about the meaning and origin of the term and the history of the doctrine in this article.
So all your points of the darker side of capitalism are actually manifestations of government involving itself in the market. Certainly, the end of colonialism created many failed states, and those failed states use their governments to facilitate the tax-avoidance and tax-fraud strategies that are common now.
None of the things you point to would exist without failed states (governments) and oppressive taxes in the first world. (btw Swiss secrecy goes back to at least the 18th century, but is based on its long-term policy of neutrality)
The failures you see in capitalism, and why it functions imperfectly, are the results of government being roughly 1/3 of the economy. This inhibits the efficient allocation of capital, which is really why market capitalism is the best economic system.
We, mostly, disagree. Again, the current form of capitalism has commercialized multiple things Smith did not think the invisible hand would properly guide.
........None of the things you point to would exist without failed states (governments) and oppressive taxes in the first world. (btw Swiss secrecy goes back to at least the 18th century, but is based on its long-term policy of neutrality)
The failures you see in capitalism, and why it functions imperfectly, are the results of government being roughly 1/3 of the economy. This inhibits the efficient allocation of capital, which is really why market capitalism is the best economic system.
We, mostly, disagree. Again, the current form of capitalism has commercialized multiple things Smith did not think the invisible hand would properly guide.
I've enjoyed this exchange. Geeze, why argue from the extremes you tend to argue from? Governments and taxes to keep them running are necessary. Organizations to promote and regulate world trade and the finances to support it are necessary unless one supports a chaotic world order. The extent of government (sovereign and otherwise) and the taxes it takes to keep them running is, for sure, debatable. So, I get your point.
I do not, however, agree with what I perceive as your notion that completely unregulated market capitalism is sustainable. That is because of the inequities created by the commercialization of the many things Hack has thoroughly described when these conversations pop up.
There is a level of government, taxation and regulation that will sustain the word's economy and by so doing, prevent wealth from accumulating in the hands of the few - an absolute requirement unless you are a pure Darwinian theorist who believes in the propriety of natural selection where human beings are concerned. I often wonder if you are that and if so, we will thoroughly disagree on most things when it comes to discussions of government, regulation and taxation.
Having said all that, I will admit that reaching middle ground in the current national and international political climate is very difficult. I'd add that US withdrawal from venues that provide the means to reach it is a bad move (see the link I posted to above).
Mission to CFB's National Championship accomplished. But the shine on the NC Trophy is embarrassingly wearing off. It's M B-Ball ..... or hockey or volley ball or name your college sport favorite time ...... until next year.
Some people think he's slipping into early onset dementia. Dunno. There's a huge difference between what he sounds like now and interviews he gave in the 80's and 90's. But this was noticed a few years ago when he entered the race.
The FBI has opened a civil rights investigation into Sheriff Clarke related to an incident back in January. They've gotten a search warrant to look at Clarke's emails from January till now.
Background: Some guy on a flight with Clarke briefly expressed disgust to Clarke's face (Clarke has described this as 'menacing stares'). When the flight landed, Clarke's deputies were waiting and detained and interrogated this guy for no apparent reason other than he made Sheriff Clarke mad.
Tweet
Comment