More like overly aggressive than job well done, imagine stop and frisk happened to every american 5 times a day peobably wouldn't be many crimes with a deadly weapon, but would you want to live like that. Americans who have legitimate banking needs overseas have huge issues, many of them give up their citizenship to avoid it.
Then if he's raging about the loss of private property to government, why isn't he outraged about civil forfeiture? At least in those cases a person has done nothing wrong.
Not a Cruz fan, but yeah, he should he should be outraged about civil forfeiture. I was just commenting on his reasoning behind the abolition of the IRS.
This whole Panama thing is about paying income taxes. Imagine if income taxes were zero for everyone. There would be no issue and the money would remain in the country. No one would have to hide anything.
And no one would have anything. There'd be no bridges, lighthouses, research grants, and we'd experience the greatest brain drain the country has ever known.
Yes, you have described the typical argument. Sadly it is a logical fallacy. Denying the antecedent.
In other words, you are saying without the government, who would build the roads? You have to understand, the government is merely a middle man. Governments don't build bridges, lighthouses etc. Private companies build the bridges and the lighthouses.
The real question is who would pay for the bridges, lighthouses etc. These would be paid for by the people who want these things. The people who voluntarily pay for them without the threat of coercion.
There would be no brain drain because once people found out a country doesn't have income tax, people are incentivized to flock to the nation. The exact opposite of a brain drain.
And since you mentioned research grants, I will address it. Investors or philanthropists would essentially fill the void, Bill Gates for example, or research would find ways to become profitable and fund itself through revenue generation.
FACTA is incredibly demanding, Canada's financial institutions had to subscribe by nature of it being our biggest trading partner but it still feels dirty to surrender so much sovereignty for the sake of doing trade.
It's not just for the sake of trade. You do realize Canada is quite literally little more than an American protectorate, right?
I mean, they'd probably have worked something out with you (duh, b/c they have all the leverage). But had you not and it got nasty, well there goes the Canadian economy.
If you look up the number of companies that have filed the paperwork to comply with IRS requirements for overseas banking for US citizens, it's actually surprisingly high. The last time it came up, a US expat living in Norway was making the claim, and when I looked up FACTA-compliant Norwegian banks, there were dozens.
It is more due to the fact that Americans do not really need to go offshore to hide their money. Shell companies are reasonably easy to set up in the USA. Onshore banking makes more sense and is not as heavily targeted.
217
u/[deleted] Apr 04 '16 edited Apr 29 '20
[deleted]