CBC cannot take a joke about their beloved Donald Trump even when I merely quote the Old Bard or Looney Tunes

Methinks that Hubby Lacroix and his many minions in the Crown Corp.'s legal department are afraid of being sued by the malicious Mr. Trump 

N'esy Pas?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/paradise-papers-rent-capitalism-tax-havens-1.4389079

Why getting rich is better for the world than staying rich: Don Pittis

Paradise Papers and U.S. tax cuts may be symptoms of a less dynamic kind of capitalism

By Don Pittis, CBC News Posted: Nov 13, 2017 5:00 AM ET


 1236 Comments
Commenting is now closed for this story.


 
Brent Grywinski

The super rich are hoarding their wealth in tax havens and helping certain politicians get elected who will not taxes on them and even give large tax breaks to enrich them further.

steve wilson

@Brent Grywinski ...and Donald Trump is on both sides of that equation.

Content disabled.

David Raymond Amos

@steve wilson Daffy Donald is on nobody's side but his own

Content disabled.

David Raymond Amos

@steve wilson Daffy Donald is a poor player who struts and frets his hour upon the stage telling a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

David Raymond Amos

@steve wilson If you could read the harmless replies that CBC blocked Trust that you would laugh at the nonsense of it all. (I quoted the old bard and looney tunes but even that is too offensive for CBC)

 

Morgan Smith

austerity for the poor ans welfare for the rich is not capitalism

David Raymond Amos

@Morgan Smith "austerity for the poor ans welfare for the rich is not capitalism" I beg to differ

Morgan Smith

@David Raymond Amos

so bailing out banks and corporations with tax dollars is capitalism??
Subsidising corporate profit with public money is capitalism??
I beg to differ

Morgan Smith

@David Raymond Amos
and then after we bail them out..they have the gall to stash their profits offshore... not to pay taxes??
while the plebes get their taxes sucked off their pay cheques...that sounds fair to you..??
that is not capitalism...
The tax payer is being ripped off ..and its global

David Raymond Amos

@Morgan Smith Capitalism benefits the capitalists. We ain't part of the club tis all.

David Raymond Amos

@Morgan Smith However we support them

David Raymond Amos

@Morgan Smith Perhaps you should Google the following words

David Amos Bank Fraud

Eugene Eklund

@Alex Shetsen "Actually, austerity for the poor and welfare ofr the rich is very definition of capitalism."

That's crony capitalism!

David Raymond Amos

@Eugene Eklund "That's crony capitalism!"

That's corny

  

Frank Poulin

Quote from Elizabeth Warren

“There is nobody in this country who got rich on their own. Nobody. You built a factory out there - good for you. But I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory... Now look. You built a factory and it turned into something terrific or a great idea - God bless! Keep a hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.”

 

 

David Raymond Amos

@Frank Poulin “There is nobody in this country who got rich on their own. Nobody." Yea right tell me another one

Methinks the mindless Yankee Dizzy Lizzy Warren forgot about a lot of people such as artists or sportsmen or folks that won the lottery N'esy Pas?

Frank Poulin

@David Raymond Amos
Are you suggesting that all artist, sportsmen and lottery winners never received any assistance along the course of their lives? Never needed medical attention, Never went to school, possibly social.assistance at some point? Didn't use our roads, called the police of fire department.
Without that type of support these people would possibly not have been able to use their talents or buy that lottery ticket.
I entertained your question but I believe that you got the essence of my comment and your trying to be difficult. For the sake of this post I will put it this way, the majority of people who have become millionairses didn't make it on their own.
Better?

David Raymond Amos

@Frank Poulin Trust that I know a lot about this topic in 2002 I sued the the Tax Man for NOT collecting taxes. Why do you think I ran for public office fives time thus far? Just to be difficult and upset people in CBC comments sections that most folks never read? If you wish to figure out the essence behind my comments Google my name and tax fraud. If I post too much the truth CBC blocks me. Go Figure.

 

  

Alice P Lynne

No mention of buying companies to sell the assets and loot the pensions?
No mention of stock buy backs?
No mention of central banks issuing all currency as a loan at interest?
No mention of BIS controlling all central banks?
No mention of the super rich Rothschild's and the system they have been allowed to create?
Why, exactly, are these fairy tale stories put out?
An abysmal effort to try to placate us people not in the club.

Sandy Gillis @Alice P Lynne

You're correct that those things are all important Alice, but this is a news website, not an issue of The Economic Journal. Deep diving into all the different aspects you're speaking off would only serve to out the underlying message of the article beyond the care or understanding of the casual reader (which are the vast majority of readers on a new website).

I think this article does a pretty good job of creating awareness that the very rich have co-opted our financial, banking, and taxation laws to ensure that they never have to pay their fair share to help support the country which allowed to them to attain that wealth in the first place. With awareness comes interest, and with interest comes deeper investigation. There needs to be a starting point.

JimWBrennan

@Sandy Gillis
Underestimating public understanding is part of the problem. It leads the desperately out of touch politicians, who themselves maintain a wide array of incomplete misunderstandings, to over estimate their now questioned power.
Silence is more an indication of tolerance than ignorance. Tolerance doesn't have the durability of ignorance.

Sandy Gillis

@JimWBrennan
Underestimating public understanding? Seriously? In an era where the US has a President who made his way to the White House in 140 character lies and fabrications? Who's underestimating anything? Judging by the number of partisan jabs following an article detailing how our effectively two party systems have allowed the ultra rich to rewrite our laws in their favour while we squabble about French villas and helicopter rides, I think you may be overestimating the understanding of the vast majority of citizens.

JimWBrennan

@Sandy Gillis
We have been misdirected by media, both parties, most corporations, even churches in some cases but that is a matter of trust more than understanding and doesn't seem to have any educational or disciplinary boundaries.
The mention of The Economic Journal and subject comprehension of readers of news websites surely has a dismissive tone that might be inaccurate.
Would Larry Summers be a good example of a person who deep dives "beyond the care or understanding of the casual reader (which are the vast majority of readers on a new website)" and applies that knowledge aptly across society?
Since libraries have been freed from monasteries the most unlikely people have been reading and understanding quite well

David Raymond Amos

@JimWBrennan Not all of us Federal Court File No T-1557-15

Sandy Gillis @JimWBrennan

"Since libraries have been freed from monasteries the most unlikely people have been reading and understanding quite well."

You're quite right Jim, but my point is not in the ability of the casual reader, but in their level of interest and understanding of the topic at the time. You don't get someone interested in medicine by throwing a copy of Grey's Anatomy at them. People don't get interested in the law by reading a copy of their local municipal by-laws.

You need a starting point before you get to the library. You need something to get people in through the door and ready to put in the time and effort necessary to understand articles which analyze complex topics in depth.

My point above is that a news website is a great place to get people interested enough in something for them to explore in more depth. My follow-up is a (admittedly dismissive) opinion on the ability of the casual reader (and I stress casual here) to have the interest or ability to read a journal-level analysis with their morning coffee. Myself included

 

 

Alice P Lynne

How can this guy, Don, always be wrong?
This is NOT capitalism. It is cronyism.
It's one big club and you ain't in it - George Carlin

David Raymond Amos

@Alice P Lynne "It's one big club and you ain't in it - George Carlin"

RIP

Good night sweet prince: And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!
Why does the drum come hither?

 

John Sollows

No surprises here. Fundamentally, wealth is the consequence of productive work.

Our current system is probably unsustainable. We had better start making serious adjustments soon towards awarding work more and trimming the benefits enjoyed by the super-rich, who don't need it anyway. Otherwise, pressures towards something more equitable will grow, and the final consequences will be messily horrible for everyone.

We need to remember, as well, that we live in one world, and too many of us humans live in misery. I would be ashamed to own a yacht or a mansion, considering that.

Michael Murphy

@Doug James "If you make money and employ people, shouldn't you be able to spend some on yourself? Why would you work for no gain? Communism does not work."

So people who work but don't employ people should have nothing to spend on themselves?

David Raymond Amos

@Michael Murphy Imagine me agreeing with a questionable lawyer? Amazing thing never cease N'esy Pas?

 

jimmysinclair

Billy Morneau didn't leave Morneau/Shepell & enter public life to serve Canadians.

In fact, he never left Morneau/Shepell.

David Raymond Amos

@jimmysinclair "Billy Morneau didn't leave Morneau/Shepell & enter public life to serve Canadians."

Methinks Billy merely wanted to put another feather in his cap and rub elbows with the oh so powerful. I would lay odds that he misses the good old days about now.

 

Kevin Graves (AKA Jaspersdad)

When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorises it and a moral code that glorifies it.

Frédéric Bastiat

Richard Riel

@Jerry O'Connor And a representation of a new queen of canada is the picture of Bronfman's. face belly laughing it off with trudo.

David Raymond Amos

@Richard Riel I recall a man with the same last name as you. Louis pointed all this sort stuff out long ago and did something about it. He saved a big portion of Canada from shady business deal and actually won a seat in Parliament but the Crown hung him anyway N'esy Pas?

BTW in 2004 I was kinda proud to join the ranks of Louis Riel when I was barred from Parliamentary properties while running tin the election of the 38th Parliament

 

Jack Richards

Time to make offshore trusts illegal.

David Raymond Amos

@Jack Richards I say create a Canadian form of FATCA so the CRA know what everybody's assets are no matter where they may be. Also change the tax code to a Flat Tax. Then rich man poor man all pay the same rate with no loopholes or rules to manipulate or play games with.

  

Stan Cox

If capitalism is to survive, the wealthy must pay taxes "proportionate to their abilities to pay."

Sharing the tax burden this way encourages Functional Investment, and creates new opportunities for growth.

Those who push for a flat tax are destroying capitalism.

Eugene Eklund

@Stephen O'Leary "It's the CBC. No one reads the articles"

Too funny! So you are saying you don't read the articles thus you are no one. Yet you comment on them?

David Raymond Amos 

@Eugene Eklund Hmmm perhaps you are arguing with a bot

Why getting rich is better for the world than staying rich: Don Pittis

Paradise Papers and U.S. tax cuts may be symptoms of a less dynamic kind of capitalism

By Don Pittis, CBC News Posted: Nov 13, 2017 5:00 AM ET

 

While the people with luxury yachts are anxious to hang on to their wealth, capitalist economic growth is founded on the efforts of the less wealthy to improve their lot. (Yannis Behrakis/Reuters)

 

 

Capitalism makes poor people rich, but only when it's working at its best.

In last week's release of the Paradise Papers, CBC Investigates helped remind us of an alternative objective of capitalism echoed in Washington's quest for tax breaks for the wealthiest.

That is the pressure to make sure rich people are able to hang on to their advantageous positions.

The historic argument over exactly how much tax each person should contribute is as much political as it is economic.

Taxation is theft (or is it property?)

The polarized politics might be characterized by contrasting the assertion by 19th-century anarchist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon that "property is theft" with the modern anarcho-capitalist insistence that "taxation is theft."

Adam Smith, the father of modern capitalism, had a pragmatic take on taxes. He argued they were essential to a well-run state and so everyone should be required to contribute.

It was Scottish economist Adam Smith, often called the father of modern capitalism, who declared people should be taxed according to their ability to pay. (David Moir/Reuters)

Among his four basic requirements for a good tax system — which included the stipulation they should not be arbitrary and that they should be convenient to collect and to pay — was that they should be "proportionate to incomes or abilities to pay."

It was Smith, not Karl Marx, who gave us the principle that rich people should pay more tax.

Someone has to pay

As previously pointed out during the 2016 release of the Panama Papers, someone has to pay for the roads and ports, corporate subsidies and bailouts that keep the Canadian economy ticking.

• Only suckers like you and me pay taxes anymore

Every penny that the well-off fail to pay falls onto the shoulders of poorer wage earners who have no way of escaping the clutches of the Canada Revenue Agency.

In a world where the rich have disproportionate clout in the corridors of power, it is no surprise that the richest 1 per cent are expected to benefit the most from the U.S. tax changes proposed last week.
That may not be good for the global economy.

There are good reasons to think that the world is returning to an era where what John Maynard Keynes called "the functionless investor" is once again superseding the active capitalist that makes economies dynamic.

If you believe in the power of capitalism to make the world a better place, it is hard to fault people like Steve Jobs and his financial backers who took risks to create an entire new industry.

From Russia with nothing

In Canada there are many examples, including the Bronfman family that came to Canada from Russia with nothing and made themselves and Canada rich. Frank Stronach, founder of car parts giant Magna International, could tell a similar story.

But since those days, Canada and the world have experienced what Bank of Canada deputy governor Sylvain Leduc recently called "declining dynamism."  

It is certainly hard to see the social contribution of passive investors who hold onto the wealth and power created by their dynamic forebears by using that power to convince governments to let them pay less in taxes.

As we are told repeatedly by advocates for people and businesses that keep billions of dollars in low-tax offshore funds, they really aren't breaking the rules.

Not illegal

"Offshore trusts are not illegal," said Ian Lee, former banker and now professor at Carleton University's Sprott School of Business.

Of course that raises the question of why the Government of Canada — as the representative of Canadian voters with a median income of about $30,000 — would create a set of laws that allows rich passive investors to avoid billions in taxes.

• Why closing tax haven loopholes is a challenge
• OECD struggles to counter corporate tax avoidance

There is a consensus in mainstream economics that whether Proudhon was right or wrong, property ownership makes economies stronger. As even self-declared Communist countries such as China and Vietnam discovered, switching from collective farms to private small-holders caused a boom in agricultural production.

However, the breaking up of huge estates controlled by a passive landowning class has shown similar economic benefits.

When it comes to money, there is increasing evidence that the funding of capital projects from what Keynes called "the savings of the rich out of their superfluity," is no longer as important as it once was. Certainly there is no shortage of cash to drive up the price of the world's safest assets.

Places like the South America and the Persian Gulf, where the rich control almost all the resources, are not models of democratic or economic health. The strongest economies are not built on selling or getting tax breaks on a few yachts and private jets. They are those with active dynamic populations where everyone can participate.

• How the rich avoid paying taxes on luxury jets and yachts

If governments want to build strong capitalist economies, rather than using their laws to help keep the wealthy rich, the evidence is that legislators must let the already rich look after themselves, and turn their attention instead to making laws that help hard-working aspiring capitalists become rich for the first time.

Follow Don on Twitter @don_pittis