Category Archives: Taxes

Tax Havens and the Greedy Rich, by Jeff Thomas

If you want to hang on to your money you’re greedy. Politicians who want to take it all away from you are humanitarians. From Jeff Thomas at internationalman.com:

In 1960, 18 European countries, plus the US and Canada, signed on to become charter members of the new Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Since that time, another 20 countries have signed on.

The Organisation was an expansion of an existing French organisation, the Organisation for European Economic Co-operation (OEEC), begun in 1948.

Not surprisingly, the OECD became an extension of the OEEC and was led by France. As such, the tone of the OECD reflected French governmental thinking on economics. As the organisation expanded its power, its direction became more focused on two of the French government’s economic fixations: worldwide collection of tax and worldwide equalisation of tax.

Of course, France is known for its often-crippling levels of taxation, and in 2013, over 8,000 French people saw their tax bills top 100% of their earnings. This extraordinary tax level was, not surprisingly, introduced by socialist President Francois Hollande.

Monsieur Hollande may have been extreme in his tax, but by French standards, not dramatically so. France has long been a bastion for the socialistic belief that the “Greedy Rich” must be forced to pay their “fair share.”

The Greedy Rich

So, who exactly are the Greedy Rich? At what level of income does one become a member of this group? Well, like most things socialist, “rich” is a sliding scale. The man who came up with a new design for widgets and borrowed money and built a factory, employing others to make the widgets, is likely to find himself categorised as “rich.”

Has he has a bad year and actually made less money than his lowest-paid employee for that year? No matter, he is still rich. (The adjective “greedy” is optional, to be used whenever criticising those being described as “rich.”)

In considering the above, if we harbour resentment for such an individual, we might define “Greedy Rich” as “someone who appears to have more money than I do.”

Of course, as stated above, this definition requires a sliding scale, as we cannot place a dollar figure on “rich.” A rich person is simply someone who appears to have more money than we do, whatever that amount might be. Similarly, “fair share” might be defined as “more than they are presently paying.”

Continue reading→

“An Absolute Mad Rush”: Californians Confess Why They’re Fleeing The State, by Jamie Joseph

I’m happy I got out in 2012. From Jamie Joseph at The Epoch Times via zerohedge.com:

When former Bay Area resident Terry Gilliam, 62, started the Facebook group “Leaving California” in 2018, the group attracted 200 members within six months. Four years later, the group has over 50,000 members, and the number continues to climb every week.

“In the last 30 days, we’ve added 11,000 members, which is darn close to a record,” Gilliam told The Epoch Times.

“And it all started on January 1st … I think there is an absolute mad rush of people who are going to get out of California this year.”

Although he formed the group a few years ago, Gilliam didn’t take the plunge and move out of state to Florida until last year. Issues like homelessness, crime, politics, cost of housing, traffic, and exorbitant taxes pushed Gilliam away—and he’s not the only one.

When the group first began, Gilliam said Idaho and Texas were the most popular destinations for California residents. Now, he’s seeing more people moving to Tennessee and Florida as well.

Earlier this month, U-Haul reported that the top states for people moving within the United States in 2021 were Texas, Florida, Tennessee, South Carolina, and Arizona, while California was at the very bottom of the list.

Matt Merrill, U-Haul area district vice president of the Dallas Fort-Worth Metroplex and West Texas, said in a statement that many people are moving to Texas from California, New York, and other states “due to the job growth—a lot of opportunity here. The cost of living here is much lower than those areas. Texas is open for business.”

Demand was so high, U-Haul even ran out of trucks leaving California last year, according to the company.

Continue reading→

What Does a Gas Station Cost You? By Eric Peters

Electric cars and their charging stations need government subsidies to ameliorate their high cost and inconvenience. From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

How much do you suppose it costs to build a typical gas station? Wait. That’s not quite the right way to phrase it. Let’s try again. How much do you suppose it costs you to build a typical gas station?

The answer, of course, is  . . . nothing.

Well, nothing beyond what it costs you to fill up your car. And you’re getting something in return for your money there. Whoever built the gas station paid for the rest. The building, the pumps. The works. Using his money – or rather (probably) money he borrowed from a bank. The transaction, then, is between the builder/owner of the gas station and the financial institution which loaned the money to make it so. Which it did because it judges there is money to be made; enough for the builder/owner of the station to pay back the loan.

You – the person pulling in for a fill-up – pay for none of this. Or rather, you’re not forced to pay for any of it. The gas – and snacks – you buy pay for it.

This is called the free market – and it works because it works to everyone’s benefit. It is not necessary to force gas stations to be built by forcing people to pay taxes to subsidize their being built. As is the case with the electric car charging stations that Joe Biden is going to force all of us to pay to get built.

How much will we be made to pay?

The number in play seems to be $5 billion, the sum to be divvidied up as payola to the various rent-seeking entities which will get paid to build them by the forces of the not-free market; i.e., by the government.

This is called redistribution – and it doesn’t work, except to the extent that it benefits the rent-seekers at the expense of those forced to pay the “rent.”

The Biden regime wants you to pay for electric charging stations placed at intervals of one every 50 miles along every Interstate highway in the country and within 1 mile of the highway. No one asks the obvious question: If there is a market-driven need for electric charging stations every 50 miles, why is there a need for the government to subsidize them every 50 miles?

Continue reading→

Yachts To Be Exempt From EU’s Carbon Pricing Plan, by Tyler Durden

This just screams, “One rule for thee, one rule for me.” From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

If there is anyone still confused why ESG, and the entire “green” movement is one giant, boiling cauldron of lies, hypocrisy and fraud, read on.

Last summer, we reported that the European Commission – that murder of career bureaucrats – has proposed exempting private jets, the one most polluting form of transportation, from the planned EU jet fuel tax. A draft indicated that the tax would be phased-in for passenger flights, including ones that carry cargo. Private jets will enjoy an exemption through classification of “business aviation” as the use of aircraft by firms for carriage of passengers or goods as an “aid to the conduct of their business”, if generally considered not for public hire. It gets better: a further exemption is given for “pleasure” flights whereby an aircraft is used for “personal or recreational” purposes not associated with a business or professional use.

This is odd because a recent report found that private-jet CO2 emissions in Europe rose by 31% between 2005 and 2019, with flights to popular destinations up markedly during summer holiday seasons. So if Europe was truly concerned about curbing CO2 emissions it would ostensibly go after some of the biggest culprits… but no.

Of course, since it is mostly billionaires and the ultra wealthy that fly private, and these same billionaires and ultra wealthy tend to be exempt from regulations (which are usually written by politicians that the ultra rich have previously bribed or bought) that apply to the rest of the peasantry, this was hardly a huge surprise.

Which is why we doubt that the latest news showing just how pervasive the “green” hypocrisy is, will also come as a surprise.

Continue reading→

The Terrifying Lessons of COVID-19, by Andrew P. Napolitano

The most terrifying lesson is that most Americans are sheep. From Andrew P. Napolitano at lewrockwell.com:

During the past 18 months, the relationship of the American people to the government has changed radically, as the Constitution’s failure to restrain the federal and state governments and to protect personal liberty has become manifest.

We know that for the past 100 years the growth of the federal government has been exponential. And we know that while formally the Constitution still exists, functionally it has failed miserably, as the deterioration of personal liberty since the spring of 2020 has been as grave as the losses of freedom in the past 100 years.

I am using 100 years as a benchmark because it marks the completion of the takeover of the federal government by the Theodore Roosevelt Republicans and the Woodrow Wilson Democrats who collectively comprised the Progressive movement. This movement brought us in a short 15 years the useless World War I, the destructive popular election of senators, the corrupt Federal Reserve, the theft of property called the income tax and the unconstitutional administrative state.

The war killed millions for naught. The popular election of senators undermined state sovereignty. The Federal Reserve destroyed economic freedom. The federal income tax legalized theft. And the administrative state created an unconstitutional fourth branch of government “experts” answerable to no one.

Yet the iron fist of totalitarian government visited upon the American people in the name of COVID-19 has struck at the heart of the Constitution and landed heavy blows on average Americans in far more acute and direct ways.

Continue reading→

What is a libertarian? By Eric Peters

Does anyone have the right to forcibly take even a penny from you? From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

Let’s begin with a question rarely asked – and almost never answered. Probably because of the answer:

Who owns you?

This is the fundamental moral – and political – question. Because everything that follows depends on how it is answered. Here is how libertarians – uncapitalized, to differentiate the more/political philosophy from the political party – answer it:

I own me, you own you. We each own ourselves. No more – and no less.

No one else owns anyone else, as that would be an affirmation of slavery, to whatever degree.

Slavery is a moral outrage, to whatever degree.

Those who advocate for it are immoral – are criminals, if they practice it.

Some hold that there is a creator God who owns everything, being the author of all of it. This may be so. But if so, his ownership does not convey title over his creations to some of his creations – to lord it over them. If there is a creator God then our relationship to him is individual – entre nous –  and cannot be conveyed to other individuals.

Nonetheless, the claim to title is regularly asserted. Originally in the form of what was styled the “divine right of kings,” who claimed their sovereign right to lord it over over others, having been “anointed” by god.

Or so they said.

This claim to title was rejected, most eloquently by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence. But without sufficient clarity. Which is why the “divine right” of individual sovereigns over sovereign individuals became the “divine right” of some individuals, who asserted their collective sovereignty over all other individuals.

Continue reading→

Facebook Admits its “Fact Checks” are just opinions, by Simon Black

Simon Black’s weekly collection of the absurd, at sovereignman.com:

Here’s our Friday roll-up of the most ridiculous stories from around the world that are threats to your liberty, risks to your prosperity… and on occasion, inspiring poetic justice.

Injured on the Commute… While Working From Home?

One major perk of working from home is having no commute.

Well, a shorter commute. You still have to walk from your bed to your desk. And that can be quite dangerous.

A German man was commuting to his downstairs home office when he fell down the stairs, and broke his back.

He said that because he was on his way to work, he was entitled to workplace accident insurance.

His employer’s insurance company refused to pay the claim, and it went to court.

Now the court has ruled that the man is in fact entitled to compensation, because the walk downstairs was no different than his commute to work.

Click here to read the full story.

Facebook Admits Fact Checks are Opinion, Not Truth

Journalist John Stossel posted a video on Facebook which suggested that government mismanagement of forests was a bigger cause of California’s wildfires than climate change.

But Facebook’s fact checkers labeled the video “misinformation” because they viewed Stossel’s report as a denial of climate change.

Continue reading→

Why Not Shop Around for the Best Government? By Simon Black

Leonardo da Vinci’s painting and engineering skills were so highly renowned that he was in extremely high demand among European nobility in the early Renaissance.

Leonardo started in the independent city-state of Florence as an apprentice artist, where he worked for the famous Medici family.

Then in the early 1480s, da Vinci went to Milan to work for Duke Ludovico Sforza (the man who commissioned The Last Supper).

At the turn of the century, the Venetian Republic briefly engaged da Vinci’s services as a military adviser. He then relocated to the Papal States to work as a military adviser for Pope Alexander VI’s son, Cesare Borgia.

By 1503, he was back to work in Florence, and in 1515 moved to France, where he lived the remainder of his life working for King Francis I.

But Leonardo da Vinci was far from the only renaissance man who could take advantage of governments competing for talent.

The leaders of Italian city-states wanted to show the world how advanced and cultured they were, and therefore would extend tax breaks, land, and even titles to talented individuals, including artists, inventors, scientists, and engineers.

And this concept still exists today as well.

For example, US cities and states competed a few years ago to attract the new Amazon headquarters to their area.

New York City was initially chosen for Amazon’s ‘HQ2’ site before New York’s crazy politicians led a revolt, and Amazon decided it wasn’t worth the political hassle.

Continue reading→

Slightly Up From Slavery, by Doug Casey

Taxation is theft and those who labor to pay them are slaves. From Doug Casey at internationalman.com:

slavery

To eliminate misunderstanding as to what taxes are, it is helpful to define the word “theft.” One good definition is “the wrongful taking and carrying away of the personal goods of another.” The definition does not go on to say, “unless you’re the government.”

There is no difference, in principle, between the State taking property and a street gang doing so, except that the State’s theft is “legal” and its agents are immune from prosecution. Many people do not accept that analogy, because the government is widely viewed as being of, for, and by the people, even though it’s also acknowledged as acting badly from time to time.

Suppose a mugger demanded your wallet, perhaps because he needed money to buy a new car and threatened you with violence if you weren’t forthcoming. Everyone would call that a criminal act. Suppose, however, the mugger said he wanted the money to buy himself food. Would it still be theft? Suppose now that he said he wanted your wallet to feed another hungry person, not himself. Would it still be theft?

Now let’s suppose that this mugger convinces most of his friends that it’s okay for him to relieve you of your wallet. Would it still be theft? What if he convinces a majority of citizens? Principles stand on their own. Even if a criminal act is committed for a good purpose, or with the complicity of bystanders, (even if those people call themselves the government), it is still an act of criminal aggression.

Continue reading→

White Knuckles Worldwide As The USSA Coyly Dangles Foreign Pork, by Becky Akers

The biggest boondoggle of the them all is the U.S. military budget. From Becky Akers at lewrockwell.com:

Every year for the last 60, the Swamp has passed a monstrous bill called the National Defense Authorization Act. That legislation has robbed Americans of billions and billions to finance the Empire’s crimes abroad. No doubt because of that gargantuan theft, the NDAA enjoys almost universal and thoroughly bipartisan support each winter when its renewal draws nigh. Nor has its enactment ever failed. Indeed, only once did its success teeter: Donald Trump ensured his title of “Most Hated President” in 2020 when he vetoed the NDAA. (Our Rulers’ massive loyalty to this honeypot ensured an easy override of that rejection.)

It gets worse. Since 2012, the NDAA has threatened American serfs not only with bankruptcy but also with kidnapping and caging for an indefinite period sans trial, even a kangaroo one. Its proponents have long soft-pedaled that menace by claiming that the provision applies only to “domestic terrorists.” Which became even more frightening under Brandon’s administration, given his relentless attempts to smear innocents as “terrorists.”

This year, the cozy little arrangement whereby the Feds, the military and the latter’s countless contractors pick our pockets clean is once again and surprisingly in danger: “…the Senate is at a standstill on the legislation. Several Republicans have delayed the process as they push for votes on their amendments to the bill, and Democratic leaders didn’t begin the floor process for the bill until this week — far later than in past years.”

But fear not, all ye who swill from the public trough: “A bipartisan [told ya!] group of senators … promised that the Senate would approve the legislation in time as it usually does.”

Or as “a frustrated Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) told reporters…,” “Don’t mess up the one thing that you can count on the Senate to do in a bipartisan [ahem!] way every year … A Senate that cannot do this hardly deserves the title.”

Continue reading→