Tax paradises should be destroyed.

[Yeekim]

The argument is justifiably in theory. It's really a matter of where you draw the line on "aiding and abetting".

It's even more of a matter where you draw the line on what is "criminal".
E.g. the Swiss banking laws enshrining secrecy were put in place at a time when Nazis enacted death penalty for people for having foreign bank accounts...

 

[gay_Aleks]

Pancakes.

Free market! Let the market decide: chocolate syrup or maple syrup? Who shall prevail in this battle?

(Let us ignore the poor souls who put cheese. They're literally communists.)

 

[Yeekim]

Free market! Let the market decide: chocolate syrup or maple syrup? Who shall prevail in this battle?

(Let us ignore the poor souls who put cheese. They're literally communists.)

Raw jam is the only acceptable answer!

 

[gay_Aleks]

Clearly you're missing honey in your equation, due to which your millions you've presumably stashed in a convenient, and most likely, island nation, will disappear as a Marine Regiment will be set for-life with your funds.

 

[Yeekim]

in a convenient, and most likely, island nation

The money is on Sakhalin, actually.

 

[gay_Aleks]

That's a big risk. What if the Japanese get their stuff together and inv- reclaim it? Your fortune would be forever lost!

 

[Yeekim]

Japanese? I was promised there'd be proper SEAL operation!

 

[gay_Aleks]

No, no. Ya can't just barge into Russia demanding all their cash. Last two people who have tried that are reviled and hate. You gotta be slow.

Harassing a bunch of islanders hiding bank accounts is much easier, safer and more enjoyable. Who doesn't like a bit of a tropical paradise while also loading off several million in unconspicious suitcases?

 

[Hygro]

You say suboptimal, I say "free market".

These are far from mutually exclusive.

It's hard to explain why trade is a bad system for optimality. It's like, we need to fill a bunch of circles, but we only have squares to do it with. Zoomed out it's okay, but there's a lot of loss.

I don't think that imagery helps explain it though.

The problem with trade is that you're always a step or few behind. There's a lag with trade. In the best case, the lag is just whats needed to negotiate understanding so that we're all on the same page. Worst case, we're all turning a hot and cold shower hot and cold with a delay and never able to get it right.

I know, I'm still not helping. It's not a thought yet, it's still a feeling.

 

[Borachio]

Trade, for profit, makes zero sense though. Basically, if you've something to sell it's worth nothing to you. It makes as much, if not more sense, to pay someone to take it away as to charge them for doing so.

Ah. And here's a paradox.

 

[Hygro]

Trade, for profit, makes zero sense though. Basically, if you've something to sell it's worth nothing to you. It makes as much, if not more sense, to pay someone to take it away as to charge them for doing so.

Ah. And here's a paradox.

I was going to argue with you, but then I realized almost everything sold is something that literally does have no use to the producer.

 

[aelf]

That's from a use value perspective, though. Orthodox economics would insist that there is a value to the seller, and that is whatever the market value of that thing he/she's selling is.

Yeah, orthodox economics is kind of circular when reasoning about value.

 

[El_Machinae]

No need. It's already being used for good.

Billionaires usually don't really have all that much money. Usually they've oodles of liquid assets. It's not clear how those assets being owned by them creates a good epiphenomenon. Someone has to own them, though.

 

[Borachio]

No need. It's already being used for good.

Just not the common good, right?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

It's even more of a matter where you draw the line on what is "criminal".
E.g. the Swiss banking laws enshrining secrecy were put in place at a time when Nazis enacted death penalty for people for having foreign bank accounts...

True. I'm just saying that there are some ridiculous theoretical uses here that would, if they happened, actually justify it. To rational people the act of having a foreign account isn't enough of a crime, but trying to bankroll something awful might be, and if the country is doing that you start seeing some grey area.

 

[civvver]

yes.

Also, I think heavy inheritance taxes above certain level should be introduced.

Why? The money was already taxed when it was earned.


As far as taxing havens, I think it should simply force the country to look at their own tax policies. Tax policy needs to accomplish two things, raising enough money to pay for essential services it's most efficient for the government to provide like defense, a legal system etc, and secondly to encourage certain types of behavior and investment that society wants.

For example if society decides hey our working population is aging too much we need more kids! you introduce tax breaks or incentives for having children. In the 80s the government decided they wanted more people to own homes so they started letting you deduct mortgage interest on your taxes as an incentive to own instead of rent.

Really when considering tax havens we should look at why corporations are putting money there vs investing it at home. Maybe our tax policy is to blame here.