Wow, that's a absurd thing to say. (Absurd wasn't my first choice of words, but I don't want to get banned).
Will Scott Brown Kill ObamaCare?
- Thread starter madanthonywayne
- Start date
What is absurd? I said that good people don't always win, unfortunately. Is that not the truth?
Land of race riots, mudslides, earthquakes, wild fires, insane real estate costs, high taxes, and a bankrupt government? Oh yeah, also sunshine. Can't forget the sunshine.
People that advocate that it's perfectly fine for insurance companies to discriminate against kids with childhood diabetes, or to call spouse abuse a pre-existing condition are not good. They are uncompassionate sociopaths that do not belong in civil society.
Yes bashing bankers is a populist move. It is one of the things that got Brown elected to the Senate. So what is wrong with the Democrats getting on board?
Two, there is no danger of a banking exodus from the US. Please get real. The banking business is very profitable when executed properly. There are thousands of banks in this country and new ones created every year.
Three bank bashing is not new in American culture. I suggest you go back and read some history, the era of the robber barons.
Well, if you asked the people of Birmingham and Coventry in the early 20th century, whether their Cities would ever produce less cars than China or India, they would have laughed.
Banking is an eminently exportable business. That is why they are treating Governments with contempt. Why would they, otherwise?
While I find the resistance of the USA to even the mildest of Socialist methods, hard to understand, I think that in a time of financial instability, Obama's aggressive approach may be a wrong move.
Socialism in America is a tool that they will not use, no matter how effective it is at solving social problems.
I'm sure people will misunderstand what I am saying, but I mean as a tool to solve specific problems rather than an ideology.
Banking is an eminently exportable business. That is why they are treating Governments with contempt. Why would they, otherwise?
While I find the resistance of the USA to even the mildest of Socialist methods, hard to understand, I think that in a time of financial instability, Obama's aggressive approach may be a wrong move.
Socialism in America is a tool that they will not use, no matter how effective it is at solving social problems.
I'm sure people will misunderstand what I am saying, but I mean as a tool to solve specific problems rather than an ideology.
Last edited:
You are mixing alot of different stuff together. First, where do you get this, banking is exportable" business? Banks operate by collecting deposits and reinvesting them. Where do the get the lion's share of their depostits? From regular businesses and people, care to tell me how they are going to do that when they are not allowed to operate in that country?
Care to tell me why banks would want to ditch 99 percent of their assets and profits and put themselves into a default condition in order to leave a country because the government offended their feelings? Get real here, your assertion that banks will pick up and leave a country if the government offends them just makes no sense. It is more scare tactics for the uninformed.
I can see that you are not going to move on this, but don't you think that the banks' total lack of concern about what anyone thinks, indicates that they have some trick up their sleeve, or do you believe that their blatant arrogance springs from stupidity?
Would people stop doing business with a bank if it moved to, say, cheap office space in Dubai, with zero taxation?
Would people stop doing business with a bank if it moved to, say, cheap office space in Dubai, with zero taxation?
Yeah, banks if not registered to do business as banks cannot do business in the US. Banks are not going to stop doing business in the worlds largest economy because someone said some bad things about them or that they have to pay more taxes. As long as it is profitable to do banking in a country banks are going to continue to do business in that country.
Zero taxation of the bank in your example does nothing for the depositors. With very few exceptions, depositors are not going to travel around the globe to make a depost every day or week (e.g. businesses). Nor are people going to travel around the globe to get a credit card or a debit card.
superstring01
Moderator
I'm sure this is painful for you to imagine, but just go to wiki and look up the basic numbers and how many Republicans are in the Congress and in the Mass state house.
Waaaah!
I put a period at the end of the part I was quoting. Ice, you're such a little crybaby. How about actually PROVE THE POINT you made. See, this is the problem, when cornered you outright lie and avoid any meaningful exchange, in stead, opting for pissing and moaning about punctuation. Quick, run away little boy!
~String
Last edited:
I have several homes there. It is a beautiful, wonderful place to play. There are some trouble spots today because of all the rain/mudslides, but it is worth
the weather problems to be there. It really is that nice.
Fantasy aside, since the UK's windfall tax on bank bonuses was announced, a number of banks with offices in the UK have announced caps on bonuses.
But what is there to prevent these banks moving to countries with less punitive tax regimes? Under international law, can countries refuse to deal with them?
And would they?
Maybe they've got nothing but bravado and they are starting to blink in the who-blinks-first contest.
What do you think?
But what is there to prevent these banks moving to countries with less punitive tax regimes? Under international law, can countries refuse to deal with them?
And would they?
Maybe they've got nothing but bravado and they are starting to blink in the who-blinks-first contest.
What do you think?
Last edited:
Banks an businesses can move where ever they want to move too as long as they comply with local laws. But as long as they want to do busisness in a country they are going to be obligated to obey local law.
So if a bank wants to move its headquarters to a different country fine, but it still has to comply with local laws as long as it does business locally. And if it wants to stop doing business locally, it is going to have to comply with local law in the disposition of bank assets.
I'll be the judge of what is trivial, when I'm dealing with people like you.string said:
Fix the quote, and try to clarify what point you're talking about - so that I don't have to guess five times abotu what you think you've read, or feel like attributing to me today, or whatever,
and I'll think about it,
or maybe just pretend to be shocked that the state that elected this guy
There's also the mountains, the desert, the beach, the food, the people, the movies, the technology and the beer. It's expensive because everyone in the world wants to live here.
Meanwhile, what does Indiana boast? Cheap real estate in places like Gary? Corn?