|
DarkCrawler posted:Hey guess what, so am I! Do you really think that by "shareholder" I mean't every goddamn country bumpkin whose parents got them an account (like me) quote:Here is an option that makes sense for people not to avoid tax - you go to jail if you do and have to pay the money back. quote:Do you think that's just something everyone does? I haven't spent a single second in trying to avoid tax. Thousands of euros appear on my account every month. I'm happy with that. Ps: Your parents giving you shares is (probably) tax avoidance according to the same definitions often used here to paint capital gains as tax avoidance. But I'm sure you've remedied that by making a donation to the Finnish state in the value of your current tax rate multiplied by the value of the shares, right? Because you wouldn't want to have any undertaxed income, that would be morally wrong. quote:Also, you seem to have a simple math problem. Top Finnish taxpayers have more money so they have to pay more tax. Right now they have means to pay less money then they should, means that non-rich people don't have, both legal and illegal. We should make the legal means illegal and prosecute the illegal means with extreme prejudice. What problem is it that you have with equality? When have you ever heard anyone in the middle class whine about having a bigger tax percentage then an unemployed person? Also serious lol (or, Jerry Cotton style,  ) if you think middle class people don't complain about their tax burden. quote:I'm also going to repeat a question that you apparently didn't seem to bother to answer: why is it that you continue to support austerity measures, when the rich aren't paying what they are supposed to pay? Why do we have to dip into the pockets of the people who pay 100% their legal taxes and don't engage in tax avoidance and are not given a chance of engaging it at anywhere close to same level, instead of people who engage in tax avoidance?
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 14:32 |
|
|
Tervehdys Ligur!
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:Tervehdys Ligur! Go to yospos gifs if you don't like people arguing with darkcrawler for pages
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
Can't we, as in the EU, just nuke all tax paradises? As for perintövero, have our mossad retrieve the traitor bastards back home and behead them at Piritori so their heirs must pay taxes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:Go to yospos gifs if you don't like people arguing with darkcrawler for pages ei kun postasin tuon koska olemme ligur sivulla
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:ei kun postasin tuon koska olemme ligur sivulla en huomannutkaan hh
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
Tänään me kaikki olemme Ligur
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
Meissä kaikissa asuu pieni Ligur. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UtbwQ0NTRw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zF8YkXDpm8
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:Why can't you route your wealth through Panama? The exact same laws apply. Just because for you the fees make whatever Panamanian arrangements too expensive doesn't mean that the rich operate under a different set of laws. Well, actually they do, in the sense that their tax rate is higher, by law. You just said the same thing I said without trying hide it, only for some inscrutable reason you don't see anything wrong with it. The money you make shouldn't affect the means available to you. I should be able to use whatever rich people do with the same returns. This is the initial assumption that you must challenge, by explaining why it is OK that rich people have the means to reduce their tax burden that isn't available for smaller amounts of owned wealth. It should absolutely mean that you pay more taxes if you earn more. This is also the assumption that you must challenge, by explaining why it is logical and a positive thing, and how it harms rich people in specific, concrete terms. I don't see them having much troubles in their lives, do you? The problem here is that you argue against some weird esoteric arguments which I haven't made in the first place, so let me spend this post trying to be even more direct (though I feel that I'm already pretty blunt). Geriatric Pirate posted:Yes, wouldn't it be weird if Finland had laws against tax evasion? What a novel idea, thanks for suggesting that. The whole point here is that those laws are not strong enough (or are not enforced enough) because they facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion. How that was not clear I don't get. The fact that you fail to somehow understand that point doesn't make anyone else look dumb then you. Geriatric Pirate posted:That's because you pay gently caress all in tax. I don't bother avoiding tax because I'd spend more money / effort trying to avoid the tax than I would paying tax. Oh really, you haven't tried avoiding the 5000 euros per year you pay in taxes? How brave of you, not trying to cheat the system which has given you a lot more than you pay into it. It's given the rich people a lot more then they pay into it. The infrastructure, workers, education, economic forces and such that enable them to make money in the first place are estimated at hundreds of trillions, the cumulative efforts of the world population in history in some incalculable number that would require a doctorate to determine accordingly. A rich person did not spend a fraction in creating the conditions that enable them to be hundreds or thousands of times more wealthy then the average person. The average person also doesn't recieve millions and millions in business subsidies to facilitate their wealth. For people who inherit their wealth or just move into an established company though their connections I don't even have to make an argument about getting more then they paid in. Accordingly they also recieve more then I do. I am not a millionnaire. It's astonishingly naive how you believe how rich people have made their own money and aren't simply better at manipulating a pre-existing system that they had ZERO effort in creating (existed before they were born) allows them to recieve that wealth (if they are smart) or were born at the top of that system. Nobody is even proposing these people not being millionnaires and billionnaires, just for them to be at slightly closer footing then the rest. Geriatric Pirate posted:Ps: Your parents giving you shares is (probably) tax avoidance according to the same definitions often used here to paint capital gains as tax avoidance. But I'm sure you've remedied that by making a donation to the Finnish state in the value of your current tax rate multiplied by the value of the shares, right? Because you wouldn't want to have any undertaxed income, that would be morally wrong. It's straight up (digital) cash, I assume it's taxed accordingly. If not that is the fault of the law, and I already am of the opinion that both that and my paycheck can be taxed more anyway. I use my only means to change that equation: vote accordingly and do not intentionally engage in any schemes to reduce my tax burden. If you think I need to intentionally give money to someone to give my fair share, well that's the problem here isn't it? The laws should be so that everyone gives what they need to give and those who get more give more. It shouldn't be voluntary. Geriatric Pirate posted:Where does your should come from? How is it "equal" that 10% of people pay tax between them than 50% of people? Because at the end they have way more money then those people. Simple mathematics and relativity. Would you accept ten million if you had to give 90% of it away right after that to say. charity of your choice or 100,000 if you didn't have to give a single cent? I think I can guess the answer. Geriatric Pirate posted:Like I said, I believe taxes should be tied to wealth, but you're not making any argument as to why they should, nevermind why they should pay even more than they pay today. Because they are making disgusting amount of money nevertheless while people who are barely getting by through no fault of their own have to accept more cuts. I have been making the argument, you have been ignoring it. Again, your job to explain why that is the wrong viewpoint to have. I've explained why yours is illogical and naive and demonstrably results into a worse world, none of which you really have addressed. Geriatric Pirate posted:You also keep using it as a convenient dodge to avoid arguments about coming up with a tax system that maximizes revenue through simplicity and reducing incentives to cheat taxes. Simplicity: There is no tax havens anywhere in the West because they have been made illegal by Western law. Any such deals with the lovely parts of the world would be punishable.The world is actually moving swifter to that way because of these constant leaks, believe or not. The mystery is why you and people like you have such a problem with that direction. Geriatric Pirate posted:It's like you seem to think that threatening people with 10 years in jail for tax avoidance is somehow feasible, It is entirely feasible, we constantly prosecute people who do that stuff. What I am saying is that we need to include more stuff under that umbrella and increase our prosecution efforts. Either way we get the money, either from the rich paying their share or from the law taking their property when it is discovered that they don't. Geriatric Pirate posted:like somehow you think that the loopholes created to avoid taxes are somehow intentional things left in the tax code for tax dodging as opposed to exceptions made for legitimate things that eventually start being "abused" (and even these cases of abuse are most often gray areas). They weren't created intentionally in some cases, in some cases they were, in all of these cases you and the politics you support seem to be against changing these things even when they allow widespread abuse and different rules for people with different-sized bank accounts. The world opinion generally doesn't see much gray here. Even Eduskunta was against both tax avoidance and tax dodging. Geriatric Pirate posted:Yes, using a Panama company is most likely abuse, but doctors forming their own companies or entrepreneurs taking dividends can be legit. When we don't leave them any chances of being less then legit, they will be legit or pay for it. Geriatric Pirate posted:And even if you could somehow map out what's right and wrong, We can, we do this all the time. Example, murdering someone is wrong. Example, engaging in tax avoidance when the world economy is suffering and you already have enough money to live like god is also wrong. The vast majority of the populace in the entire world would agree with both. Geriatric Pirate posted:the most likely thing about increased penalties would be anyone who doesn't have an immediate need to be in Finland moving abroad. If the Western world is unified with it's legislation they don't have anywhere to move into where they would want to live in, nor anywhere that would be willing to take the hit from sanctions and the like. Geriatric Pirate posted:Also serious lol (or, Jerry Cotton style, Nowhere near the same degree, especially relative to the money they are left with. quote:How can I give a "straight answer" to a loaded and misleading question? The rich already pay most of the taxes in this country, that's a fact. They are the most prosperous people in this country. That is also a fact. quote:Tax evasion is illegal, so anyone not paying what they're supposed to pay is a criminal. Tax avoidance needs to be criminal, tax evasion needs to be prosecuted with far more resources. quote:You're not going to squeeze much more money out of the rich with your vague and unrealistic plan to "end tax avoidance" (which every politician since the beginning of time has promised) So you are just completely ignoring the fact that EU is losing trillion euros a year to BOTH tax evasion and tax avoidance? quote:but you risk having them cut investment or move abroad. I wish them well in the Glorious People's Republic of North Korea. About the only place they have left if the developed world gets its poo poo together. And it actually is, more and more. Used to be that the idea of taxing rich people at all was ridiculous. Look at where we are now. quote:I support politicians who work under realistic assumptions, Only thing that makes any of my suggestions unrealistic is people like you who want rich people to have access to widespread tax avoidance and are less then enthusiastic about policies that make prosecution of tax evasion more efficient. You guys should probably stop doing that? quote:and while that includes shutting down illegal tax avoidance, they understand that we operate in a global economy and that capital and people can be pretty mobile. And the abuses of this system, whether or not they are legally permitted at the moment or not should be curtailed by the entire international community, but I'll settle with the first world. The global economy isn't some infinite immutable thing. It radically changes in almost a decade basis, faster and faster as the world progresses. We've limited its legal excesses continually since it has been born, there is no reason why we couldn't limit it more. The rich aren't certainly getting any poorer as it is. quote:Li Andersson can post on twatter about how we have to stop companies from doing business in tax havens and blahblahblah until you realize that we're in an economic union with many countries with different tax policies (including at least 3 that are commonly referred to as tax havens), That's cool and great, it allows for a much faster and much more unified response... quote:with many companies that operate under complicated structures for legitimate reasons and that we can't just "end tax avoidance" with a few extra laws and that chasing these companies would a) cost us tons of money in fees and just create more loopholes and b) could potentially scare the companies away, leading to 0 taxes paid. Just the question, are you under the impression that European Union hasn't already ahem, unified a great deal of the different laws and policies of its member states? Why is corporate & tax law some sacrosanct thing that shouldn't be touched? It really is amazing how evangelistic neoliberalism is. Companies aren't godlike entities removed from the constraints of time and space. Rich people aren't ubermensch immune to law. We punish them all the time. We just need to punish them more efficiently and widely. There is a shitload of money in that business. DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 21:31 on Apr 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
Puistokemisti posted:Meissä kaikissa asuu pieni Ligur. lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VajltfQpN80
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
Jesus gently caress that's a long post. Yet you still haven't answered any of the basic points, such as "why is the top 10% of taxpayers paying more tax than the bottom 50% not fair enough for you?" You keep saying that it's not fair because they are paying below their statutory rate, as if somehow that is the hallmark of fairness. You complain that poor people don't have the means to lower their tax rates, but ignore that despite rich people lowering their tax rates, they still pay more (in pure euros definitely, in percentages likely as well) than poor people. And you say the law treats rich people differently, when it's not the law but the simple fact that lowering your tax rate for a fee doesn't make sense if your tax rate is already so low that the fee doesn't make sense. So let me just try to quickly address the main points before going to sleep, without quoting parts or anything boring like that: 1) In general you're approaching the topic of tax avoidance and tax evasion with almost zero actual knowledge of what happens, how the laws are set up or the details of transactions involved, simply armed with your ideology of "the rich don't pay enough". It's seriously as if though you think corporate structures are complicated just to avoid tax and not because international law and doing business abroad as part of a complex organisation might not be the simplest thing. Yeah, fine, some loopholes can be closed, and many are being closed, but none of that is going to be significant enough to ever shut you up. There is an international response to tax evasion and avoidance, just like with tax evasion penalties in Finland you seem to think it's just something we should "do" as opposed to an ongoing slow process. 1b) And secondly, even if somehow magically tomorrow Germany, France and Britain start a huge EU wide push to equalize tax rates or something, your attitude right now is that the rich in Finland don't pay enough tax. How is an effort by the leading EU countries in which the rich pay less tax than in Finland ever going to end up in a favorable solution for you? 1c) Why do you think that if the EU were to harmonize corporate tax laws, the result would be Finland everywhere instead of Luxembourg everywhere? 2) You say public opinion is clearly against tax evasion, but neglect that public opinion is also clearly in favor of lower taxes on income in Finland. 3) Most rich people, in Finland and globally, are self-made, in the sense that most of the income they have earned is the result of their own labour. The share of people whose wealth comes from inheritance is tiny. These are both 100% undisputable facts. You can cry about inherited wealth blahblahblah all along but it (as well as the Panama thing) are just a complete misrepresentation of the facts. You can go all goon and say they have benefited from roads and schools and whatever, but the fact is that most have also paid a lot more into the system than they have taken out. 4) Your parents giving you cash is also tax avoidance, because cash can be given tax free and even if they give you enough to pass the tax threshold, the tax rates are much lower than for earned income. It's completely ridiculous that you complain and complain and complain about how rich people avoid taxes through all these measures without realizing that your parents are giving you cash (i.e. income) on which you pay absolutely no tax. And guess what? Anyone can do that! 5) As noted before, you've given literally zero details on what actual tax avoidance is, yet you suggest punishing people more harshly for it. Explain to me, for instance by way of a few examples, of currently legal tax avoidance that should be illegal, and how exactly you would punish it. You keep saying stuff like harsher penalties and penalties for doing things that are legal (which in itself seems a bit morally dubious, but maybe I'm just brainwashed by neoliberalism and things like a sense of justice), but you haven't actually explained what that would entail. I mean there are some things that I agree should be illegal, but most tax avoidance is a gray area and you saying "no it isn't, parliament said it isn't" when the prime minister and at least two ministers have used things most people would call "tax avoidance" and just about every MP has probably done some things that lower their tax rate below their normal income tax rate doesn't make much sense. Furnish me with some examples. Anne Berner's Belgian company, Sipila's insurance covers and so on, just to help you a bit. Should they be illegal? How should we determine whether others using the same tools are doing so legitimately? Should Berner and Sipila be punished for using them when they were legal? In summary though... I suspect you're the one driven by ideology (in this case, "gently caress the rich"): you offer no concrete details, you don't appear to have much knowledge about international commerce and you keep making these arguments about fairness without articulating why in Finland, which already taxes the rich more than almost any other country in the world, they are still not being taxed enough. Geriatric Pirate fucked around with this message at 00:13 on Apr 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:In summary though... I suspect you're the one driven by ideology (in this case, "gently caress the rich"): you offer no concrete details, you don't appear to have much knowledge about international commerce and you keep making these arguments about fairness without articulating why in Finland, which already taxes the rich more than almost any other country in the world, they are still not being taxed enough. If they actually paid taxes, their tax rate could be lower. But some time ago you also said that fixing the tax code would be too much of a hassle, so...
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
[the "hehhehhe" clip from the Siitoin sound board]
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 07:38
|
|
|
https://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=83&artikel=6404347 Cheers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 09:37
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Can't we, as in the EU, just nuke all tax paradises? As for perintövero, have our mossad retrieve the traitor bastards back home and behead them at Piritori so their heirs must pay taxes. I've been saying this for a while.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 09:39
|
|
|
Isn't it only Mossack Fonseca & Co data that leaked? I would assume there's many more similar companies? Doesn't this just mean that nordea, iceland politicians etc. just got very unlucky. Wouldn't other banks and other politicians have similar schemes in different tax haven companies? I'm just thinking that nordea is getting more poo poo than it should 
DeadlyHalibut fucked around with this message at 09:55 on Apr 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 09:53
|
|
|
DeadlyHalibut posted:Isn't it only Mossack Fonseca & Co data that leaked? I would assume there's many more similar companies? Doesn't this just mean that nordea, iceland politicians etc. just got very unlucky. Wouldn't other banks and other politicians have similar schemes in different tax haven companies? In markkinatalous, Nordea wouldn't even exist today. e: That seems like a non-sequitur. What I mean is Nordea doesn't deserve to exist and making GBS threads on it is good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 09:59
|
|
|
Jerry Cotton posted:In markkinatalous, Nordea wouldn't even exist today. I still find it very hard to believe that Nordea would be the only company doing this poo poo, just the only one to get caught. Non-sequitur or not.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:11
|
|
|
DeadlyHalibut posted:I still find it very hard to believe that Nordea would be the only company doing this poo poo, just the only one to get caught. Non-sequitur or not. No of course they aren't the only one. If only one murderer out of a hundred gets caught, does he not deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law? (I chose murder instead of robbery since who knows the robber might be a victim of SSS and only steals to feed his starving children.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:38
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:It really is amazing how evangelistic neoliberalism is. Companies aren't godlike entities removed from the constraints of time and space. Rich people aren't ubermensch immune to law. We punish them all the time. We just need to punish them more efficiently and widely. There is a shitload of money in that business. You're acting like you'll actually get him to read your goddamn post instead of just coming up with some complete bullshit. According to his gimmick, money is an indicator of moral purity, not a means of exchange enabled by society. You need to drunkpost less. Or more, so you skip directly into "gently caress it".
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:48
|
|
|
Jerry Cotton posted:No of course they aren't the only one. If only one murderer out of a hundred gets caught, does he not deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law? (I chose murder instead of robbery since who knows the robber might be a victim of SSS and only steals to feed his starving children.) Fair enough yes. But still the public mielensäpahoittajat boycotting nordea and switching to another big bank who hasn't got caught yet seems pretty funny.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 11:52
|
|
|
DeadlyHalibut posted:Fair enough yes. They should've switched banks the second Nalle Wahlroos first said anything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 12:23
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:ei kun postasin tuon koska olemme ligur sivulla  
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 12:50
|
|
|
This link whizzes over everyone here, because it is in pakkoruotti, which we do not actually speak. I for one welcome our future Pakkoarapi-overlords.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 16:19
|
|
|
Thanks guyz, love and respect  edit: 14/88 edit2: mods... that is a joke Ligur fucked around with this message at 18:05 on Apr 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
adhuin posted:This link whizzes over everyone here, because it is in pakkoruotti, which we do not actually speak. If you open the link with chrome, it gives you the option to use the built-in translator function. In any case, looks like the Finnish-exported vigilante movement has produced some interesting "results" in Norway: http://observatorial.com/2016/04/04/norway-muslim-migrants-grope-and-molest-women-get-beaten-up-by-soldiers-of-odin/
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
OhYeah posted:In any case, looks like the Finnish-exported vigilante movement has produced some interesting "results" in Norway: http://observatorial.com/2016/04/04/norway-muslim-migrants-grope-and-molest-women-get-beaten-up-by-soldiers-of-odin/ I wonder why Brändi Stubb isn't promoting this Finnish brand of "problem solving".
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
OhYeah posted:If you open the link with chrome, it gives you the option to use the built-in translator function. Probably not actually happened, or as Jerry would say literally happened.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
OhYeah posted:If you open the link with chrome, it gives you the option to use the built-in translator function. Err, haven't I heard this news before somewhere? Yup, except it happened in Russia. Even the accompanied picture is the same. Most damning of all, the original story they ripped off was based on lies. It might be thus possible that news from Norway isn't true either. But don't let that stop you, there's FUD to spread! How was your month long probation btw?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
Rexroom posted:How was your month long probation btw? Very refreshing. Considering the direction D&D has taken I'm sure that the next one is not too far off. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
exclamation marx is a loving joke of a mod
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
OhYeah posted:http://observatorial.com/2016/04/04/norway-muslim-migrants-grope-and-molest-women-get-beaten-up-by-soldiers-of-odin/ lol, you still read and quote weirdo reactionary racist websites
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
So far I've seen on soldier of odin IRL It was some ~30yo woman enjoying the sunny day with her kids Must have been a violent wife beater though, can't let the looks deceive you
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
Why are these right wing lunatics allowed to roam the streets?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
OhYeah posted:Very refreshing. I should hope so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
I wonder what Hitlep's opinion of Hitler is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 14:32 |
|
|
Herman Merman posted:lol, you still read and quote weirdo reactionary racist websites Nope, I just check Sargon's reddit at least once a day because there is some guaranteed nonsense there that will cheer me up. I know this might be a shock to you, but I don't actually think that vigilante movements are a very good idea. Soldiers of Odin is a wrong answer to a problem that shouldn't exist in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 23:21
|
|