Trump, Boris, the super rich, etc.

[dolf]

Fact check, please and thank you!

https://youtu.be/hmnkutTvQnI

How much of this is true?

 

[Saint Peter]

fuck up
move up

 

[jaF0]

How much of this is true?

Dunno. Nothing to go on but a link to a Belgian domain. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.be)


Words would help immensely.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Fact check, please and thank you!

https://youtu.be/hmnkutTvQnI

How much of this is true?

It's nuggets of truth swimming in bullshit.

Things like CEO's being taller on average and such I'm sure are true.

Wanting the economy moving (boom to recession to boom) is what they want.

The "it's not fair!!" line is total garbage. Notice the video never points out that NONE of these corporations, CEO's or rich people stick a gun to "poor" and working class folks heads forcing them to spend their money.

The "poor" and working calss hand it over with a smile.

They get that new smart phone every several months.

They go out and buy a new wardrobe every year, gotta look good for facebook!!!

They choose not to maintain their vehicle until it's trashed and then trade it in every other year.

They go out and party, go out and eat and put it all on that 18% APR credit card.

Then they turn around and cry about how evil CEO's took all their money!!

And of course the answer to that? Government force!!! The state must threaten violence, take from those who do have self control and decent money management skills and redistribute it to those who do not. Because THAT is fair!

Oh and if that fails BECAUSE ENVIRONMENT!!

Funny how state authority to confiscate assets and money to redistribute to the "needy" is ALWAYS....ALWAYS the answer to climate change and people not cleaning up their shit. What a fuckin' load.

 

[RobDownSouth]

It's nuggets of truth swimming in bullshit.
Things like CEO's being taller on average and such I'm sure are true. Wanting the economy moving (boom to recession to boom) is what they want. The "it's not fair!!" line is total garbage. Notice the video never points out that NONE of these corporations, CEO's or rich people stick a gun to "poor" and working class folks heads forcing them to spend their money. The "poor" and working calss hand it over with a smile.They get that new smart phone every several months. They go out and buy a new wardrobe every year, gotta look good for facebook!!!They choose not to maintain their vehicle until it's trashed and then trade it in every other year. They go out and party, go out and eat and put it all on that 18% APR credit card. Then they turn around and cry about how evil CEO's took all their money!! And of course the answer to that? Government force!!! The state must threaten violence, take from those who do have self control and decent money management skills and redistribute it to those who do not. Because THAT is fair! Oh and if that fails BECAUSE ENVIRONMENT!! Funny how state authority to confiscate assets and money to redistribute to the "needy" is ALWAYS....ALWAYS the answer to climate change and people not cleaning up their shit. What a fuckin' load.

^^^Wealth Envy Word Salad
Also
https://iwasyou.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/poor__households_2.png

 

[dolf]

You have a point when it comes to luxuries, but lot of it is unavoidable. Poor people still buy medicine, buy gas to get to work, buy electricity and water for their homes, buy cleaning products and food at the nearest grocery store. Hell, even donating to charity is often paying for the ceo's 6 figure salary. Unless you own land enough to live off the grid, and have access to local producers, it's pretty hard not to hand over your money to the fat cats.

 

[BotanyBoy]

^^^Wealth Envy Word Salad
Also
https://iwasyou.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/poor__households_2.png

Oh look, another reading fail from Comrade Rob.

 

[BotanyBoy]

You have a point when it comes to luxuries, but lot of it is unavoidable. Poor people still buy medicine, buy gas to get to work, buy electricity and water for their homes, buy cleaning products and food at the nearest grocery store.

And anyone with a job that isn't stupid enough to try and live beyond their means can afford those necessities.

You go to the cheap whatevers, you use coupons, you shop wisely.

Millions make it work every day.

Hell, even donating to charity is often paying for the ceo's 6 figure salary.

If a charity pays the people who run it more than you think is fair then donate to a different charity that pays them something you think is fair.

It's voluntary, just like all the other exchanges.

Unless you own land enough to live off the grid, and have access to local producers, it's pretty hard not to hand over your money to the fat cats.

Not even then...because living on the land in anything but a totally primitive manner requires exchanges with other people. Because you can't do it all on your own.

 

[jomar]

Don't know much about Boris, but for Trump it rings pretty true from what I've read CEO-wise. He plays pretty fast and loose with laws, ignores or tries to get around regulations and has been sanctioned/paid fines a fair bit, but his outlook is that if he didn't get convicted of something it never happened. Sometimes the things he does to avoid taxes is kind of clever - like getting a huge tax break on a golf course property taxes because he put goats on part of it and gets a farm tax break.

He has ties to NY organized crime. He misleads investors and sucks money out of his enterprises (most notably his casinos) to the point he declares bankruptcy and walks away or pays pennies on the dollar, in essence losing your money but keeping his. He doesn't pay contractors on a whim, which has actually put people out of business. He's largely a brand and is considered to be a poor man's version of what a rich person should look like.

 

[dolf]

And anyone with a job that isn't stupid enough to try and live beyond their means can afford those necessities.

You go to the cheap whatevers, you use coupons, you shop wisely.

Millions make it work every day.

My point was that all of those goods and services are usually provided by companies with highly paid bosses. Being diabetic hands money to pharma CEOs. Right or wrong, the movement of money from the ordinary folk to the super rich isn't something that people can opt out of.

 

[Go_Fuck_Yourself]

http://assets.survivalinternational.org/static/campaigns/uncontactedtribes/11935069_960.jpg

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/hR90t55CvbE/maxresdefault.jpg

 

[BotanyBoy]

My point was that all of those goods and services are usually provided by companies with highly paid bosses.

Do you think that's a bad thing?

Being diabetic hands money to pharma CEOs. Right or wrong, the movement of money from the ordinary folk to the super rich isn't something that people can opt out of.

Not in all cases no, I agree with you on that.

But I don't see that as a bad thing, without those exchanges there is no insulin and diabetics all die.

Things would get medieval pretty quickly if we weren't able to engage in the exchanges that allow people to specialize. No pay? No specialization.

 

[dolf]

Not in all cases no, I agree with you on that.

But I don't see that as a bad thing, without those exchanges there is no insulin and diabetics all die.

Things would get medieval pretty quickly if we weren't able to engage in the exchanges that allow people to specialize. No pay? No specialization.

Oh, no, no problem with buying and selling. That's always happened and will continue to happen.
That's not what I was questioning, I was just pointing out that being part of this isn't optional.

 

[trysail]

"The strong prey on the weak."
​

They didn't teach me that in school. Instead, Mr. Chips (he of the massive trust fund and equally massive guilt complex) preached all kinds of religious bullshit.

It wasn't until I was well out of school that somebody finally told me the truth (see above).





​

 

[BotanyBoy]

Oh, no, no problem with buying and selling. That's always happened and will continue to happen.
That's not what I was questioning,

Not that, I didn't think you were questioning the need for exchanges.

Hopefully I can clarify.

Do you think it's bad for people to get and be rich as a result of those exchanges?? All exchanges being voluntary and 'fair'.

Fair meaning not fraudulent or deceptive.

I was just pointing out that being part of this isn't optional.

No, and you're 100% right. Certainly not if you want to live above the caveman/jungle hut level.

 

[dolf]

Not that, I didn't think you were questioning the need for exchanges.

Hopefully I can clarify.

Do you think it's bad for people to get and be rich as a result of those exchanges?? All exchanges being voluntary and 'fair'.

Fair meaning not fraudulent or deceptive.



No, and you're 100% right. Certainly not if you want to live above the caveman/jungle hut level.

But are most exchanges voluntary?

 

[BotanyBoy]

But are most exchanges voluntary?

From a liberal/capitalist perspective if there isn't a gun to your head (legal or literal) then yes.

Need =/= force.

 

[stickygirl]

So where do you stand on conglomerates that avoid paying tax? Are they not the super rich getting richer? Or the Putins, who own countries? Maybe, like them, you think paying tax is for the weak because for the rich "It's voluntary"

All you want to do is take cheap shots at people but then

Millions make it work every day.

you contradict yourself. You can't have it both ways.

Instead of deflecting to what the scummy poor do, get back to the OPs question. Take people like Turing Pharmaceuticals who increased the price of a 62 yr old drug from £13.50 a tablet to £750.
Or the increasing dependency of poor countries on China as a result of hybrid rice, that produces increase yield, but cannot be used as seed by the farmer.
Jacob Rees Mogg, our twit-silver-spoon politician, who's reportedly creamed off £7m from investments in Russia and China since Brexit began.

Google avoided paying £1.5bn tax in 2017 in the UK alone
Amazon has paid just £62m in tax to the UK govt in 20 years
Facebook paid £15.8m on £1.3bn sales in 2017
Alexander Zhukov, oil magnate, lived in the UK for 23 years and never paid tax.

Who calls the super rich to account? Not the fuckers we elect, clearly

 

[BotanyBoy]

So where do you stand on conglomerates that avoid paying tax?

Same as Joe and Jane minimum wage.

Prove they didn't pay their taxes in court, prosecute according to the law.

Maybe, like them, you think paying tax is for the weak because for the rich "It's voluntary"

It's not voluntary, rich people pay almost all the income taxes in the USA.

If they get caught evading taxes they pay huge fines and or go to prison for tax evasion. Happens all the time.

All you want to do is take cheap shots at people but then
you contradict yourself. You can't have it both ways.

What cheap shots?

What contradiction???

Take people like Turing Pharmaceuticals who increased the price of a 62 yr old drug from £13.50 a tablet to £750.
Or the increasing dependency of poor countries on China as a result of hybrid rice, that produces increase yield, but cannot be used as seed by the farmer.

I don't see the problem with any of that.

Don't like what they offer? Take your money elsewhere.

Who calls the super rich to account? Not the fuckers we elect, clearly

Well...let's be honest here your government and democracy are a total farce, theatre for the plebs of the former United Kingdom.

Your actual leaders and overlords are the super rich in Brussels.

 

[stickygirl]

Same as Joe and Jane minimum wage.
Prove they didn't pay their taxes in court, prosecute according to the law.

I know you're not naive, so stop being obtuse. Multinationals employ huge teams of law experts to avoid paying tax: the law can't move quickly enough because the law is set by politicians with noses dripping from their troughs.
Not wishing to deflect here, but it's hysterical that Trump is being impeached for something everyone knows politicians due: connive, cheat, defraud, lie and cover up. Trump and his team are so deep in shit they think corruption is a good thing.

"At £35bn, the government’s official estimate of tax losses is now the highest it has ever been in cash terms since figures were first published in 2008. ... Worryingly these estimates have been increasing sharply in recent years. The tax gap has increased by 17 per cent since 2016 when the figure was £30bn.

If you think that sounds bad, the reality is much worse.

If you dive into the detail of (UK's tax agency) HMRC’s research, you quickly see that the tax gap is not a measure of tax avoidance that anyone would recognise. For example, the way in which HMRC calculates the tax gap specifically excludes profit shifting by multinational companies, the kind of tax avoidance strategies used by Google, Starbucks, Facebook and others.

Profit shifting is thought to cause the Treasury losses of many billions a year. Indeed a study by TaxWatch of profit in the tech industry estimated losses of £1bn a year from just five US tech companies."

 

[BotanyBoy]

I know you're not naive, so stop being obtuse. Multinationals employ huge teams of law experts to avoid paying tax: the law can't move quickly enough because the law is set by politicians with noses dripping from their troughs.

I'm not being obtuse, I'm being real about paying taxes one is legally obligated to pay vs. paying the taxes some people THINK they should be paying.

If a company is following the law and paying their obligation? That's not tax evasion.

"At £35bn, the government’s official estimate of tax losses is now the highest it has ever been in cash terms since figures were first published in 2008. ... Worryingly these estimates have been increasing sharply in recent years. The tax gap has increased by 17 per cent since 2016 when the figure was £30bn.

If you think that sounds bad, the reality is much worse.

If you dive into the detail of (UK's tax agency) HMRC’s research, you quickly see that the tax gap is not a measure of tax avoidance that anyone would recognise. For example, the way in which HMRC calculates the tax gap specifically excludes profit shifting by multinational companies, the kind of tax avoidance strategies used by Google, Starbucks, Facebook and others.

Profit shifting is thought to cause the Treasury losses of many billions a year. Indeed a study by TaxWatch of profit in the tech industry estimated losses of £1bn a year from just five US tech companies."

"Losses" on money that was never the UK's to begin with.......lol

That's right up there with some of the (D)'s here who think letting rich people keep more of their money was stealing from the poor.

If the law isn't taxing people enough for your taste, change the laws.

But you'll not convince me a company is malicious, bad or evil because they followed the laws and paid what they were legally obligated to instead of what someone thinks they SHOULD pay.

 

[bellisarius]

I'm not being obtuse, I'm being real about paying taxes one is legally obligated to pay vs. paying the taxes poor people THINK they should be paying.

If a company is following the law and paying their obligation? That's not tax evasion.




"Losses" on money that was never the UK's.......lol

That's right up there with some of the (D)'s here who think letting rich people keep more of their money was stealing from the poor.

If the law isn't taxing people enough for your taste, change the laws.

But you'll not convince me a company is malicious, bad or evil because they followed the laws and paid what they were legally obligated to instead of what someone thinks they SHOULD pay.

Oh, most of the dems don't think that at all. They know damn well that the poor aren't going to benefit one iota. But it's the mantra the dems use to get the uneducated and those who like to take guilt trips to vote for them.

The dems have been waging their war on poverty for damn near 60 years now and yet the percentage of people living at or near the poverty level has hovered in the 12% to 15% region ever since. When you look at the percentage of the monies allocated for these programs versus the monies that actually end up in the hands of the poverty stricken it becomes obvious that the entire welfare system is nothing more than a government jobs program.

 

[SpeareChucker]

So where do you stand on conglomerates that avoid paying tax? Are they not the super rich getting richer? Or the Putins, who own countries? Maybe, like them, you think paying tax is for the weak because for the rich "It's voluntary"

All you want to do is take cheap shots at people but then
you contradict yourself. You can't have it both ways.

Instead of deflecting to what the scummy poor do, get back to the OPs question. Take people like Turing Pharmaceuticals who increased the price of a 62 yr old drug from £13.50 a tablet to £750.
Or the increasing dependency of poor countries on China as a result of hybrid rice, that produces increase yield, but cannot be used as seed by the farmer.
Jacob Rees Mogg, our twit-silver-spoon politician, who's reportedly creamed off £7m from investments in Russia and China since Brexit began.

Google avoided paying £1.5bn tax in 2017 in the UK alone
Amazon has paid just £62m in tax to the UK govt in 20 years
Facebook paid £15.8m on £1.3bn sales in 2017
Alexander Zhukov, oil magnate, lived in the UK for 23 years and never paid tax.

Who calls the super rich to account? Not the fuckers we elect, clearly

No one ever calls "the rich" to account.
They elect the fuckers. They will always be on top.
They actually enjoy it when you rail at them; it raises more Capital.

This is why we need a FairTax.org...

 

[SpeareChucker]

You are too focused on the outcome
which allows you to ignore the mechanism...


All we ever hear from the Left is
"targeted taxes" to punish the rich.

This is why they laugh at you; you work for them...

 

[dolf]

You make a good point, botany. None of us pays more tax than required. Mine are simple, deducted from my wages. The bodybuilding toyboy with the huge cock©, running his own business, pays his accountant to make sure of it.

But is the system that decided who pays what fair? Does the average voter or small business have the same influence on the system as big business? Are there incentives for politicians to be fair, or to favour some groups?

Regardless of the answers, the questions are important...