I live in America and get my family's meds mail-order from a well-established Canadian pharmacy. Saves me thousands of dollars, with or without insurance. Ironically, I'm not leeching off of the Canadian tax-supported health system - the Canadians are actually making a PROFIT off of me, even though those same meds from US sources are 10-100 times higher in price. In the spring I'll be flying to Bolivia to have dental work from an American (ex-patriot) dentist with a state-of-the-art facility and staff. Most of the cost will be in airfare and lodging, but four times cheaper than the same treatment in the US. I'll mix in some sight seeing to make it more of a vacation. Other Americans are flying to Spain for experimental brain surgury, paying out of pocket, generating profits for private practitioners, and getting treatment not available in the US even if it was affordable (which it never is).
In the end it doesn't matter what health care system America had as long as the laws are written to serve the interests of lobbying groups with billion dollar budgets.
In most countries a business is required to establish a local legal entity to operate within it's borders. At a bare minimum most nations require the appointment of a registered agent based in the country. This is intended to protect local citizens and businesses from businesses based in other countries that do business within their borders. It is also important for complying with local laws and regulations, and payment of taxes applicable to business carried out within their borders. If you are harmed by a foreign business you have a much harder time suing them or collecting judgments if they do not have a local presence.
In theory there is some protection for the foreign business in that the national legal entity functions as a subsidiary of the foreign-owned parent company. A litigant might be able to take all assets owned by the national legal entity, but face a much harder time collecting from the parent company based in another country.
I was going to post a plug for Avatar as well. Visually stunning. Though the storyline is just Dances with Wolves adapted to the Space-Adventure/Sci-Fi genre.
If Canada agrees to the same extradition agreements like the UK has with the US, the IRAA/MPAA Gestapo might prefer to persue criminal prosecution as opposed to civil litigation. Never mind that the laws aren't in place, they can lobby efficiently to get those laws in place relatively quickly.
I agree with holding the rich accountable, but it's easier said than done. Consider for a moment how many people move to America to earn their fortunes, knowing they can always move back to where they came from and retire with millions and a low cost of living. I've been to hospitals where you couldn't find a doctor that didn't have a foreign accent. How often is it that you meet an new member of the management team who was born in some other country? Or engineers? American-born citizens are a minority in most science and engineering PhD programs. But most American-born citizens won't have a second passport or dual citizenship to save them when the SHTF. The people growing rich in this country are not likely to have been born here. Those of us born here with no where to run are often stuck in wage slavery. Heaven forbid you have a child with "special needs", though this happens in 1 out of 5 families. The insurance executives, big pharma, and for-profit hospital execs (and non-profit execs who also make million-dollar salaries) have finally figured out how to game the system for maximum profit at the expense of the vulnerable. We have a "safety net" that makes certain that entire families are means-tested into poverty even if they were educated, employed at well-paid jobs, and had "good" health insurance. Our fearless leaders closed the bankruptcy escape in 2005, and at that time it was considered the financial "nuclear option". Nowadays it's just easier to dodge debt collectors and wait out the SOL rather than attempt an impossible ch.13 five year payment plan that absorbs every "disposable" dollar you take home during your peak earning years. Ch. 13 only has a 30% success rate, at best.
But the same weapons you aim at the rich can just as easily be aimed at the poor and middle class. Those weapons won't stop the rich anyway - they have too many friends in high places, they can hire smart attorneys to exploit well designed and well concealed loopholes, and they will leave the country if the water boils to quickly. After the rich vanish with their wealth, what's left of the middle class will become the next target.
So I'd rather preserve the right for all people to flee this country legally whenever the need should arise. Keeping cash offshore can be a critical component of maintaining that freedom since offshore accounts can't be as easily siezed by the government during a crack-down, so I support the right to do so. Freedom from government oppression should be top priority. The rich benefit directly from their lobbying power, so they can bear an additional share of the load required to maintain the society they choose to live in. But freedom from oppression must be preserved first before taxing the rich man. Demanding too much from the rich will be like ordering the rich man's armed bodyguard to hand you the rich man's wallet. Whose side is the bodyguard going to take, when he's the man with the gun? Not too many liberals in uniform these days - what an ironic pity. It is reasonable to ask the rich to pay a greater share of the common burden, but policies need to be pushed that increase the earning power of the middle class to grow again and offer a counter-balance to the extreme wealth and influence of the Walmart, Oracle, and Koch executives. Taxing the mega-rich is only a short term band-aid and on its own won't be enough to reverse the steady demise of the blue and white collar working classes.
Watch out when you start building guillotines, digging graves, or constructing concentration camps. You'll be the one marching straight into it with a song in your heart and a beat in your step. Student's of history know what I am saying.
As for myself, I'm entertaining a job offer from Sweden, where there are slightly higher taxes but I would save millions in care for my autistic daughter, free college degree for my son, and have less worry of slipping further through the US social safety net. Not to mention 200+ years of neutrality, very low debt to GDP ratio (compare
Oddly enough, in most countries tax evasion is considered a civil matter, not criminal. The US is the only nation rampaging around the world looking for US bank accounts hiding in Switzerland or the Cook or Cayman Islands, threatening to imprison anyone who doesn't spill the beans on every American's private financial details.
The first American convicted in this most recent witch-hunt was the son of a holocaust survivor who's father told him to always keep some cash overseas because you never know when tyranny will come knocking and you'll need that cash to buy your way out of the country before the ghetto walls are sealed.
Most people aren't even aware of the bizarre means with which they can end up "owing" tens of thousands of dollars of US taxes. Say you visit a hospital and somehow or another there is some miscommunication between your providers and your insurance company...or an outright scam...that leaves you owing $100k in medical debt because one of your dozen or so providers at the hospital turned out to be "out of network" (and didn't bother to even inform you that he was treating you. In fact, he may have just been 'observing' you in accordance with state law, and now you're stuck with his bill). Outraged, you refuse to pay, and after 2-3 years of dealing with collection agencies, refusing to pay one penny, they realize that even if they sue you they will still not get paid. So they decide to "forgive" your debt. Which, depending on your income and net worth, could leave you owing $50k in federal tax since the forgiven debt is considered taxable income for that year. This is just one of literally dozens of scenarios thousands of people wake up to in horror every day. In fact, most people who owe thousands in back taxes usually made rather simple decisions in ignorance, and the government doesn't simply allow for transactions to be reversed. It's one of the reasons why most smart people hire well educated CPAs to file every tax return because making just one mistake on a tax return could land you in jail for years and leave your family impoverished for decades. Even though they read the tax language in plain English to mean just what it seemed to be saying, the words used by the IRS rarely follow any of the definition's found in Webster's dictionary.
Taxpayer: "But form 58495 said I don't owe tax as long as I followed rule 3.5.a" Taxman: "But form 99867 says you do owe tax if you meet condition (b) in tax volume 64, page 973" Taxpayer: "But how am I supposed to know this when it's impossible to even read one time through the whole tax code in one lifetime?" Taxman: "Ignorance of the law.... "
I believe in the value of a broad and effective social safety net and I understand that probably means we can't enjoy the benefits of a small and efficient government that doesn't have power to control every detail of a citizen's life. But what has the US become? And yet look at the tangle of strings they call a safety net? We have one of the biggest and most intrusive governments that controls its citizens even after they have permenantly fled the country (try not filing your taxes after moving to Sweden or France and see how long before you're threatened with criminal charges and they try to get you extradited for prosecution). The compromise between Reps and Dems is a big and powerful government that doesn't help it's citizens until they have been means tested into poverty.
The right to flee this country should be added as an amendment to the Constitution. I thought only Communists restricted their citizen's ability to leave their borders.
Take this argument to the extreme, and all voting is an act of aggression, since by your vote you are sanctioning a third party to have authority over your neighbor. Factor in the power of a few media moguls to sway public opinion of large populations and the campaign contributions of the top 1% who hold the majority of the nation's (and the world's) wealth, and look what you end up with.
A smarter government would actually follow the federal style the founders envisioned, where a smaller population has more potential to represent the will of the people since grassroots movements would hold more sway and citizens would be more involved in their local self-determination. The best example of federalism is probably Switzerland. In fact the country is a good example for the rest of the world to follow. They don't invade other countries or tie themselves into complicated defense treaties, they try to encourage peaceful relations that other countries have with each other, they value financial privacy, maintain diplomatic relationships with just about every nation on earth - even North Korea, religion isn't a factor in political elections, no prohibition of physician assisted suicide, they rarely extradite suspects to other nations, value defense and allow (used to require) citizen-soldiers to keep fully automatic assult rifles in their homes, and yet they also understand the value of maintain an effective social safety net.
Exactly. Which is the reason why InTrade is no longer accepting US customers. This is also true for a huge number of "unregulated" financial services companies based in Europe and elsewhere. More and more are now refusing to accept US customers, even simple ForEx companies. In some cases the US government works with the national and local governments of the areas that the firms operate from and use treaties to force compliance. In other cases where the treaties aren't in effect, the US just makes a long list of threats, such as arresting company officers the minute they are found within a US jurisdiction, arresting company employees, freezing assets located in the US and also within nations "friendly" to the US, and so on. Once they read the story of Mr. Carruthers most executives agree to comply and implement their no-US policies.
US restrictions on where and how US citizens can engage in financial transactions around the globe are far reaching. You can't even have more than $10k in an account outside the US or send or receive $10k to or from foreign sources without reporting it to the IRS. US financial regulations prohibit foriegn firms from soliciting certain investment products to US citizens, and this definition of "solicitation" INCLUDES simply have a website in English. So most of these firms just stick with their no-US policy. Even those that take US citizens make you swear that you sought them out first without viewing their webpage to comply with the rediculous US rule.
But don't worry - there's always a loophole for those who "contribute" to their congressman's re-election campaigns. In most cases a US citizen can set up an offshore corporation, and that corporation could engage in many activities that are illegal for US individuals. Such corporations can usually set up business accounts with the same companies that ban US citizens. Foreign based "nominee" officers, directors, registered agents, and shareholders can be provided by specialty firms if the citizenship of the corporate officer becomes and obstacle. But US laws and regulations involving such entities and extremely complex with severe consequences for non-compliance. They are usually reserved for "qualified" investors like Mitt Romney who can hire a full time team of CPAs to ensure compliance. And of course there are mafia thugs who set up the same offshore companies with much less concern about compliance. Just google "offshore corporation", "offshore banking", and "offshore asset protection" to learn more.
Americans - you need to understand that you are a free people with protected freedoms, as long as you practice those freedoms as subjects of US jurisdiction regardless of where you travel, reside, or with whom you do business. Yes, technically, you can't even buy a Cuban cigar and smoke it where they are sold without restriction just across the borders in Canada and Mexico. And for you perverts who travel to Thailand to engage in acts that are illegal in the US, expect to be prosecuted upon your return to US territory - it happens quite regularly.
Good point. It's all too easy to spin pre-shredded documents to look like your docs are being shredded when the real docs are being transferred to a safe storage box to sell to corporate spies and ID theives. A document scanner could also just as easily be installed between the feeder and the cutting blades to record data milliseconds before shredding. Printers and copiers are a major security concern as well since most of today's models will save digital copies of recently printed documents in onboard memory. If you have secrets worth shredding it's probably best not to outsource the task to a guy with a truck earning minimum wage. Same goes to outsourcing your IT department.
Can't. The dept. hasn't had room in the budget for a computer since 1975. And what with viruses and hackers and too many idiots who don't understand cyber security, using a computer would lead to even bigger leaks of secret information.
...They should spend a few more dollars and get a shredder that can reduce their paper to dust or at least small bits instead of long strips.
You must be one of those tax-and-spend liberals. The solution is to shutdown the police department, reduce firearm regulations, and allow the invisible hand of the free market to decide who can get away with crime.
1: Is higher IQ across the whole population really better for the species? Insects are perhaps to most well adapted species to this planet's environment, and the most adaptable to radical changes in the environment. Given that smarter humans tend to have fewer kids, it seems logical that IQ will reach a peak.
2: The advent of writing may have inadvertently lead to this peak in IQ. When people can do their thinking easier on paper instead of mostly in their own head, it seems natural that the cranial muscles won't be exercised to quite the same level as before, and bean counters with lower IQ can slip past Darwin's safeguards to perpetrate their traits deeper into the gene pool. If dependency on paper and pen limited intellectual capacity, then I hate to think what computers and smart phones are doing to us now.
It was just another of their bioluminescent mimcry tricks. They swarmed to create the illusion of a volcano to scare away the humans so they could pull away undetected and hide in obscurity, increasing their numbers until the time comes for them to attack.
One more reason to move ahead with global warming and destroy this planet before it gets the better of us.
The dynamic is cyclical, or rather, spiral. The most aggressive farmers who invested more in machinery and expanded their farms, buying out their neighbors, and so forth. In the short term there was suffering among the unemployed and underemployed. But eventually those farmers who succeeded with machinery and expansion had more disposable income and wanted to spend some of it. This lead to a demand for better goods and new luxury items. Automation in factories had similar up-and-down spiral effects, with short term periods of serious disruption to worker's standard of living, but in the long term those companies which were successful had wealthy owners and well paid managers who wanted to spend money on new and nicer things. Flash forward to today where even some of the poorest households have TVs, stereo systems, internet, and so on.
So, in the past, whenever laborers were squeezed out of a market they were able to adapt and in some cases thrive by selling basically "non-essential" goods and services to those who were successful in the original market. The problem is there is no guarantee that this sort of pattern can continue indefinitely. When the ultra-wealthy decide that they're machines can produce for them everything they need and they have no incentive of paying a new labor force for better or new products and services, then we (those of us in the non-wealthy category) are screwed. It's also worth noting that the middle of the 20th century saw the rise of the middle class, which was for a while almost self-sustaining. It's much easier to find a market to serve people who are in the same income range as you or just a little higher and when that group is 70-80% of the population. When the working masses have to compete for the attention of the top 1% then the system is just not going to be quite as self-sustaining.
Unfortunately there are already millions of millionaires and the new emerging economy is a top tier economy of private companies owned by one-percenters providing services for one-percenters. It's as if our world economy is on the verge of returning to a form of medieval feudalism.
OK, maybe, but distinct in that some residents still speak Cornish, and Cornish was a dominant language in the region up until the 1850's. Culturally and historically speaking it is significantly different onto it's own compared to the rest of England. Today of course most residents probably don't even know this.
I couldn't have said it better myself. And his paintings were also utter dogshit. But so were the works of many other modern and post-modern artists of his time and to follow. Such a pity that the Nazi's had to stick their nose into it and label it "degenerate art". Now I can't point at the emperor's new clothes and mock without being labeled a f*cking Nazi.
It's all semantics. You need to learn newspeak. Here are some excerpts from the Newspeak dictionary:
OLD:NEW
Hunger : Eager Homelessness : Camping Starvation : Weight Loss Destitution : Simplicity Shivering in the cold : Adventuring in the great outdoors Subsisting on skewered sewer rats : urban wildlife conservation and sportsmanship Begging for pocket change : Peer-to-Peer Fundraising
make a living anyway without having to work for it.
You just offended 49% of the Americans who voted for Romney, you insensitive clod!
Didn't you know that already 47% of Americans see themselves as victims and think they are entitled to basic necessities of life? What's going to happen when 1.5 billion Chinese start expecting a daily ration of food when they are hungry, a wheel chair when they are disabled, or a soft bed and blanket when they are sick? Even the thought of people expecting such handouts without working three full-time jobs is repulsive to almost half the population of the USA, and yet you have the gall to make such a remark as yours. Shame on you! Shame!
If anybody really wants to eat, have a place to sleep, or get medicine when they're sick, they can start their own private equity firm just like Mitt Romney did. Yet there are millions of people choosing to take the easy way out, working "fun" or "meaningful" jobs like teaching, ambulance driving, researching, park rangering, firefighting, or policing that pay much less than what they could earn in finance, sales or management. But after working most of their lives for a subsistence wage, if they cannot afford a mere $750,000.00 for a single organ transplant, cancer treatment, or chronic disease management, then what right do they have to tax the millionaires that are running the whole economy practically on their own? They made their choice and should face their own consequences.
China isn't communist. If it were, the government wouldn't be allowing a mega-corporation from their capitalist arch-nemesis to exploit their workers on their own soil to the point that guards have been placed on 24 hour watch to prevent suicides and installed netting to catch would-be suicide jumpers.
Slashdot Mirror
I live in America and get my family's meds mail-order from a well-established Canadian pharmacy. Saves me thousands of dollars, with or without insurance. Ironically, I'm not leeching off of the Canadian tax-supported health system - the Canadians are actually making a PROFIT off of me, even though those same meds from US sources are 10-100 times higher in price. In the spring I'll be flying to Bolivia to have dental work from an American (ex-patriot) dentist with a state-of-the-art facility and staff. Most of the cost will be in airfare and lodging, but four times cheaper than the same treatment in the US. I'll mix in some sight seeing to make it more of a vacation. Other Americans are flying to Spain for experimental brain surgury, paying out of pocket, generating profits for private practitioners, and getting treatment not available in the US even if it was affordable (which it never is).
In the end it doesn't matter what health care system America had as long as the laws are written to serve the interests of lobbying groups with billion dollar budgets.
In most countries a business is required to establish a local legal entity to operate within it's borders. At a bare minimum most nations require the appointment of a registered agent based in the country. This is intended to protect local citizens and businesses from businesses based in other countries that do business within their borders. It is also important for complying with local laws and regulations, and payment of taxes applicable to business carried out within their borders. If you are harmed by a foreign business you have a much harder time suing them or collecting judgments if they do not have a local presence.
In theory there is some protection for the foreign business in that the national legal entity functions as a subsidiary of the foreign-owned parent company. A litigant might be able to take all assets owned by the national legal entity, but face a much harder time collecting from the parent company based in another country.
I was going to post a plug for Avatar as well. Visually stunning. Though the storyline is just Dances with Wolves adapted to the Space-Adventure/Sci-Fi genre.
You laugh, but my computer crashes every time I read your comment. Dang it! Happened again! WTF!?!
If Canada agrees to the same extradition agreements like the UK has with the US, the IRAA/MPAA Gestapo might prefer to persue criminal prosecution as opposed to civil litigation. Never mind that the laws aren't in place, they can lobby efficiently to get those laws in place relatively quickly.
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/11/28/1334200/tvshack-founder-signs-deal-avoiding-extradition?utm_source=rss1.0mainlinkanon&utm_medium=feed
I agree with holding the rich accountable, but it's easier said than done. Consider for a moment how many people move to America to earn their fortunes, knowing they can always move back to where they came from and retire with millions and a low cost of living. I've been to hospitals where you couldn't find a doctor that didn't have a foreign accent. How often is it that you meet an new member of the management team who was born in some other country? Or engineers? American-born citizens are a minority in most science and engineering PhD programs. But most American-born citizens won't have a second passport or dual citizenship to save them when the SHTF. The people growing rich in this country are not likely to have been born here. Those of us born here with no where to run are often stuck in wage slavery. Heaven forbid you have a child with "special needs", though this happens in 1 out of 5 families. The insurance executives, big pharma, and for-profit hospital execs (and non-profit execs who also make million-dollar salaries) have finally figured out how to game the system for maximum profit at the expense of the vulnerable. We have a "safety net" that makes certain that entire families are means-tested into poverty even if they were educated, employed at well-paid jobs, and had "good" health insurance. Our fearless leaders closed the bankruptcy escape in 2005, and at that time it was considered the financial "nuclear option". Nowadays it's just easier to dodge debt collectors and wait out the SOL rather than attempt an impossible ch.13 five year payment plan that absorbs every "disposable" dollar you take home during your peak earning years. Ch. 13 only has a 30% success rate, at best.
But the same weapons you aim at the rich can just as easily be aimed at the poor and middle class. Those weapons won't stop the rich anyway - they have too many friends in high places, they can hire smart attorneys to exploit well designed and well concealed loopholes, and they will leave the country if the water boils to quickly. After the rich vanish with their wealth, what's left of the middle class will become the next target.
So I'd rather preserve the right for all people to flee this country legally whenever the need should arise. Keeping cash offshore can be a critical component of maintaining that freedom since offshore accounts can't be as easily siezed by the government during a crack-down, so I support the right to do so. Freedom from government oppression should be top priority. The rich benefit directly from their lobbying power, so they can bear an additional share of the load required to maintain the society they choose to live in. But freedom from oppression must be preserved first before taxing the rich man. Demanding too much from the rich will be like ordering the rich man's armed bodyguard to hand you the rich man's wallet. Whose side is the bodyguard going to take, when he's the man with the gun? Not too many liberals in uniform these days - what an ironic pity. It is reasonable to ask the rich to pay a greater share of the common burden, but policies need to be pushed that increase the earning power of the middle class to grow again and offer a counter-balance to the extreme wealth and influence of the Walmart, Oracle, and Koch executives. Taxing the mega-rich is only a short term band-aid and on its own won't be enough to reverse the steady demise of the blue and white collar working classes.
Watch out when you start building guillotines, digging graves, or constructing concentration camps. You'll be the one marching straight into it with a song in your heart and a beat in your step. Student's of history know what I am saying.
As for myself, I'm entertaining a job offer from Sweden, where there are slightly higher taxes but I would save millions in care for my autistic daughter, free college degree for my son, and have less worry of slipping further through the US social safety net. Not to mention 200+ years of neutrality, very low debt to GDP ratio (compare
Oddly enough, in most countries tax evasion is considered a civil matter, not criminal. The US is the only nation rampaging around the world looking for US bank accounts hiding in Switzerland or the Cook or Cayman Islands, threatening to imprison anyone who doesn't spill the beans on every American's private financial details.
The first American convicted in this most recent witch-hunt was the son of a holocaust survivor who's father told him to always keep some cash overseas because you never know when tyranny will come knocking and you'll need that cash to buy your way out of the country before the ghetto walls are sealed.
Most people aren't even aware of the bizarre means with which they can end up "owing" tens of thousands of dollars of US taxes. Say you visit a hospital and somehow or another there is some miscommunication between your providers and your insurance company...or an outright scam...that leaves you owing $100k in medical debt because one of your dozen or so providers at the hospital turned out to be "out of network" (and didn't bother to even inform you that he was treating you. In fact, he may have just been 'observing' you in accordance with state law, and now you're stuck with his bill). Outraged, you refuse to pay, and after 2-3 years of dealing with collection agencies, refusing to pay one penny, they realize that even if they sue you they will still not get paid. So they decide to "forgive" your debt. Which, depending on your income and net worth, could leave you owing $50k in federal tax since the forgiven debt is considered taxable income for that year. This is just one of literally dozens of scenarios thousands of people wake up to in horror every day. In fact, most people who owe thousands in back taxes usually made rather simple decisions in ignorance, and the government doesn't simply allow for transactions to be reversed. It's one of the reasons why most smart people hire well educated CPAs to file every tax return because making just one mistake on a tax return could land you in jail for years and leave your family impoverished for decades. Even though they read the tax language in plain English to mean just what it seemed to be saying, the words used by the IRS rarely follow any of the definition's found in Webster's dictionary.
Taxpayer: "But form 58495 said I don't owe tax as long as I followed rule 3.5.a" .... "
Taxman: "But form 99867 says you do owe tax if you meet condition (b) in tax volume 64, page 973"
Taxpayer: "But how am I supposed to know this when it's impossible to even read one time through the whole tax code in one lifetime?"
Taxman: "Ignorance of the law
I believe in the value of a broad and effective social safety net and I understand that probably means we can't enjoy the benefits of a small and efficient government that doesn't have power to control every detail of a citizen's life. But what has the US become? And yet look at the tangle of strings they call a safety net? We have one of the biggest and most intrusive governments that controls its citizens even after they have permenantly fled the country (try not filing your taxes after moving to Sweden or France and see how long before you're threatened with criminal charges and they try to get you extradited for prosecution). The compromise between Reps and Dems is a big and powerful government that doesn't help it's citizens until they have been means tested into poverty.
The right to flee this country should be added as an amendment to the Constitution. I thought only Communists restricted their citizen's ability to leave their borders.
Take this argument to the extreme, and all voting is an act of aggression, since by your vote you are sanctioning a third party to have authority over your neighbor. Factor in the power of a few media moguls to sway public opinion of large populations and the campaign contributions of the top 1% who hold the majority of the nation's (and the world's) wealth, and look what you end up with.
A smarter government would actually follow the federal style the founders envisioned, where a smaller population has more potential to represent the will of the people since grassroots movements would hold more sway and citizens would be more involved in their local self-determination. The best example of federalism is probably Switzerland. In fact the country is a good example for the rest of the world to follow. They don't invade other countries or tie themselves into complicated defense treaties, they try to encourage peaceful relations that other countries have with each other, they value financial privacy, maintain diplomatic relationships with just about every nation on earth - even North Korea, religion isn't a factor in political elections, no prohibition of physician assisted suicide, they rarely extradite suspects to other nations, value defense and allow (used to require) citizen-soldiers to keep fully automatic assult rifles in their homes, and yet they also understand the value of maintain an effective social safety net.
Exactly. Which is the reason why InTrade is no longer accepting US customers. This is also true for a huge number of "unregulated" financial services companies based in Europe and elsewhere. More and more are now refusing to accept US customers, even simple ForEx companies. In some cases the US government works with the national and local governments of the areas that the firms operate from and use treaties to force compliance. In other cases where the treaties aren't in effect, the US just makes a long list of threats, such as arresting company officers the minute they are found within a US jurisdiction, arresting company employees, freezing assets located in the US and also within nations "friendly" to the US, and so on. Once they read the story of Mr. Carruthers most executives agree to comply and implement their no-US policies.
US restrictions on where and how US citizens can engage in financial transactions around the globe are far reaching. You can't even have more than $10k in an account outside the US or send or receive $10k to or from foreign sources without reporting it to the IRS. US financial regulations prohibit foriegn firms from soliciting certain investment products to US citizens, and this definition of "solicitation" INCLUDES simply have a website in English. So most of these firms just stick with their no-US policy. Even those that take US citizens make you swear that you sought them out first without viewing their webpage to comply with the rediculous US rule.
But don't worry - there's always a loophole for those who "contribute" to their congressman's re-election campaigns. In most cases a US citizen can set up an offshore corporation, and that corporation could engage in many activities that are illegal for US individuals. Such corporations can usually set up business accounts with the same companies that ban US citizens. Foreign based "nominee" officers, directors, registered agents, and shareholders can be provided by specialty firms if the citizenship of the corporate officer becomes and obstacle. But US laws and regulations involving such entities and extremely complex with severe consequences for non-compliance. They are usually reserved for "qualified" investors like Mitt Romney who can hire a full time team of CPAs to ensure compliance. And of course there are mafia thugs who set up the same offshore companies with much less concern about compliance. Just google "offshore corporation", "offshore banking", and "offshore asset protection" to learn more.
Americans - you need to understand that you are a free people with protected freedoms, as long as you practice those freedoms as subjects of US jurisdiction regardless of where you travel, reside, or with whom you do business. Yes, technically, you can't even buy a Cuban cigar and smoke it where they are sold without restriction just across the borders in Canada and Mexico. And for you perverts who travel to Thailand to engage in acts that are illegal in the US, expect to be prosecuted upon your return to US territory - it happens quite regularly.
Good point. It's all too easy to spin pre-shredded documents to look like your docs are being shredded when the real docs are being transferred to a safe storage box to sell to corporate spies and ID theives. A document scanner could also just as easily be installed between the feeder and the cutting blades to record data milliseconds before shredding. Printers and copiers are a major security concern as well since most of today's models will save digital copies of recently printed documents in onboard memory. If you have secrets worth shredding it's probably best not to outsource the task to a guy with a truck earning minimum wage. Same goes to outsourcing your IT department.
Can't. The dept. hasn't had room in the budget for a computer since 1975. And what with viruses and hackers and too many idiots who don't understand cyber security, using a computer would lead to even bigger leaks of secret information.
Stop reading 1984 as fiction/entertainment, and instead read it as a how-to manual, and your questions will be answered.
...They should spend a few more dollars and get a shredder that can reduce their paper to dust or at least small bits instead of long strips.
You must be one of those tax-and-spend liberals. The solution is to shutdown the police department, reduce firearm regulations, and allow the invisible hand of the free market to decide who can get away with crime.
Nobody else can do it. I've already patented it.
1: Is higher IQ across the whole population really better for the species? Insects are perhaps to most well adapted species to this planet's environment, and the most adaptable to radical changes in the environment. Given that smarter humans tend to have fewer kids, it seems logical that IQ will reach a peak.
2: The advent of writing may have inadvertently lead to this peak in IQ. When people can do their thinking easier on paper instead of mostly in their own head, it seems natural that the cranial muscles won't be exercised to quite the same level as before, and bean counters with lower IQ can slip past Darwin's safeguards to perpetrate their traits deeper into the gene pool. If dependency on paper and pen limited intellectual capacity, then I hate to think what computers and smart phones are doing to us now.
It was just another of their bioluminescent mimcry tricks. They swarmed to create the illusion of a volcano to scare away the humans so they could pull away undetected and hide in obscurity, increasing their numbers until the time comes for them to attack.
One more reason to move ahead with global warming and destroy this planet before it gets the better of us.
This is why I place ads on the main page of my websites and you can only view content from the popups.
The dynamic is cyclical, or rather, spiral. The most aggressive farmers who invested more in machinery and expanded their farms, buying out their neighbors, and so forth. In the short term there was suffering among the unemployed and underemployed. But eventually those farmers who succeeded with machinery and expansion had more disposable income and wanted to spend some of it. This lead to a demand for better goods and new luxury items. Automation in factories had similar up-and-down spiral effects, with short term periods of serious disruption to worker's standard of living, but in the long term those companies which were successful had wealthy owners and well paid managers who wanted to spend money on new and nicer things. Flash forward to today where even some of the poorest households have TVs, stereo systems, internet, and so on.
So, in the past, whenever laborers were squeezed out of a market they were able to adapt and in some cases thrive by selling basically "non-essential" goods and services to those who were successful in the original market. The problem is there is no guarantee that this sort of pattern can continue indefinitely. When the ultra-wealthy decide that they're machines can produce for them everything they need and they have no incentive of paying a new labor force for better or new products and services, then we (those of us in the non-wealthy category) are screwed. It's also worth noting that the middle of the 20th century saw the rise of the middle class, which was for a while almost self-sustaining. It's much easier to find a market to serve people who are in the same income range as you or just a little higher and when that group is 70-80% of the population. When the working masses have to compete for the attention of the top 1% then the system is just not going to be quite as self-sustaining.
Unfortunately there are already millions of millionaires and the new emerging economy is a top tier economy of private companies owned by one-percenters providing services for one-percenters. It's as if our world economy is on the verge of returning to a form of medieval feudalism.
OK, maybe, but distinct in that some residents still speak Cornish, and Cornish was a dominant language in the region up until the 1850's. Culturally and historically speaking it is significantly different onto it's own compared to the rest of England. Today of course most residents probably don't even know this.
I couldn't have said it better myself. And his paintings were also utter dogshit. But so were the works of many other modern and post-modern artists of his time and to follow. Such a pity that the Nazi's had to stick their nose into it and label it "degenerate art". Now I can't point at the emperor's new clothes and mock without being labeled a f*cking Nazi.
We like to refer to it as "extreme weight loss" with higher rates of mortality than most competitive dietary past times.
It's all semantics. You need to learn newspeak. Here are some excerpts from the Newspeak dictionary:
OLD:NEW
Hunger : Eager
Homelessness : Camping
Starvation : Weight Loss
Destitution : Simplicity
Shivering in the cold : Adventuring in the great outdoors
Subsisting on skewered sewer rats : urban wildlife conservation and sportsmanship
Begging for pocket change : Peer-to-Peer Fundraising
If we take the founders of Facebook as an example
http://abcnewsradioonline.com/business-news/facebook-co-founder-denounces-us-citizenship.html
What does that say about the USA?
make a living anyway without having to work for it.
You just offended 49% of the Americans who voted for Romney, you insensitive clod!
Didn't you know that already 47% of Americans see themselves as victims and think they are entitled to basic necessities of life? What's going to happen when 1.5 billion Chinese start expecting a daily ration of food when they are hungry, a wheel chair when they are disabled, or a soft bed and blanket when they are sick? Even the thought of people expecting such handouts without working three full-time jobs is repulsive to almost half the population of the USA, and yet you have the gall to make such a remark as yours. Shame on you! Shame!
If anybody really wants to eat, have a place to sleep, or get medicine when they're sick, they can start their own private equity firm just like Mitt Romney did. Yet there are millions of people choosing to take the easy way out, working "fun" or "meaningful" jobs like teaching, ambulance driving, researching, park rangering, firefighting, or policing that pay much less than what they could earn in finance, sales or management. But after working most of their lives for a subsistence wage, if they cannot afford a mere $750,000.00 for a single organ transplant, cancer treatment, or chronic disease management, then what right do they have to tax the millionaires that are running the whole economy practically on their own? They made their choice and should face their own consequences.
China isn't communist. If it were, the government wouldn't be allowing a mega-corporation from their capitalist arch-nemesis to exploit their workers on their own soil to the point that guards have been placed on 24 hour watch to prevent suicides and installed netting to catch would-be suicide jumpers.