The judge is not likely to care one way or the other. Like most public officials nowadays the judge will most likely care only about how his decisions from the bench will be perceived by his future employer, such as a lobbying group or a pro-industry arbitration firm.
If we both live in the same community and exchange similar goods and services with the members of the community, and I pay the required taxes, and you do not, you cannot figure out who is getting raped and pillaged? I have to drop my prices to compete with you, but you get to maintain your standard of living. As you grow richer, as a result of your low-handed, illegal, and unfair tax evasion tactics, you are able to buy more of what you want within the community. Perhaps you and I may bid against each other on a house, but you will be able to outbid me because of all the cash you have illegally accumulated. And after you buy this house, and other goods and services from the community, you drive up the prices. And since property tax is also based on value in most communities, I end up paying even more taxes because the new house you bought down the street raised the average value of all the other houses on the street.
I don't equate lawfull and ethical business practices with "raping and pillaging," but when you've seen what corruption, theft, and organized crime can do to a community, I don't know of a more fitting word.
US citizens have to report the institutions and account numbers for any funds held outside the US if the combined total exceeeds $10k. This requirement even extends to beneficiaries of trust funds. You can use google to find the form if you don't believe me. This reporting is required even if there is no interest income or even if there is a net loss due to account maintenance costs, etc.
They might as well keep their money offshore since they're creating all of these jobs offshore anyway. Except for those tax evaders who hire illegal immigrants in the US. I guess that's a good thing. For somebody.
--
Comments may be biased from a U.S. middle class perspective.
Now that he is in the crosshairs of the US government am I the only one that sees Julian's actions as evidence that he has been turned into a double-agent, cooperating with his prosecutors for a reduced sentence? It's not as if the US government hasn't been trying to uncover the identies of these Swiss account holders, right?
It almost reminds me of when the Napster boys settled their lawsuit with the RIAA by agreeing to hand over the identities of their customers so that the RIAA could spread their reign of terror by suing single mothers, homeless men, and elderly shut-ins for the balance of their life savings and potential future earnings.
If they're weathly enough to have a Swiss bank account then they are wealthy enough to LEAVE. If they're so concerned about protecting their families from the evil tax collector, then we are better off without them. In the US, for anyone with enough cash worth protecting there are plenty of legal ways to structure assets to reduce tax obligations and other risks - just consult an attorney specializing in estate planning, asset protection, or tax law. As a middle class American I can't participate and in that sense I don't think it's fair for these loopholes to exist, but they are legal, so I don't see a problem when people choose these options.
But there is a special class of "rich" that likes to bitch and moan, and they have no problem with flagrantly violating the law to hide assets overseas. They will always complain but they will never leave as long as the raping and pillaging is so profitable.
How about MS Windows 3D on the 800GHz Intel Quantum Processor with superconducting high speed bus, including 256TB of Spintronic RAM powered by a single 0.2VDC supercap. There's always something on the horizon to get excited about.
Reminds me of when the US Patent Office declared "everything that could have been invented has been patented." That was in the mid 1800's.
I honestly believe that the internet has the capacity to empower basic human freedoms more than any other development in history, even the printing press. The Open Source movement is just one example of how the internet can take long established and universally accepted theories of capitalism, commerce, production, distribution, patents and copyrights and turn it on its head.
However, there are two major weaknesses of the internet. First, it is dependent on semiconductor technology, which to my knowledge even the most talented home-brew geek cannot fabricate in his garage. At best he could program an FPGA, but he still needs a massive silicon foundry and the associated supply chain of toxic chemicals and kilojoules of energy to supply his components. If the "powers that be" can control the supply of microprocessors (or worse, sneak malicious tracking or blocking circuitry into the chips) then they can (theoretically) control and regulate the flow of information over the internet.
Second is that the internet is still largely dependent on the fiber put in place by some of the world's most powerful corporations. It is this fiber that is the target of government surveillance and regulation.
While the "home brew" microchip does not seem to be on the horizon, the potential for neighbors to connect directly to each other in an ad-hoc, free (as in speech and in beer [except for the hardware]), and unregulated manner does seem to be feasible, but as the threat of severe censorship is not yet upon us there is little incentive for such a self organizing network to get off the ground. The key to such a network is that it needs to be completely independent from providers of infrastructure, which would include cable, phone, and cellular networks. If anyone knows of any projects in the works I would be interested in getting involved.
Ultimately I think one of the best ways to dispose of tyranny is to render such powers as redundant and impotent. Once a population doesn't benefit from or rely on their government then the government is seen only as an oppressor. Most colonial territories are now independent nations for this very reason. Sometimes peacefully, sometimes not.
As for the UN, I find it interesting that in this modern world we have a United Nations and we have a United States and a United Kingdom, but there does not exist a "United Peoples". Perhaps if such an entity could form then the tyranny of nation-states could come to an end.
Conservative idiots tend to get their information from Fox News and talk radio. Conservative by nature they resist change and still don't have internet access. Majority of conservative idiots live in the boonies where there is no internet available. Satellite is everywhere so they get that. As for radio, if you've ever driven through the boonies then you know what I mean - there are only two types of radio channels: country music and religion.
That said, liberal idiots quickly adapt to change so we all get our news from online news sources such as Slashdot, which posts articles from The Guardian, Solon.com and other "fair-and-balanced" news sources. As far as idiots go, the "show me the birth certificate" crowd is just as whacked as the "911 was an inside job" crowd.
The only problem with that theory is that an "acceptable" percentage of people will watch the shows and buy the products dispite the annoying loud commercials. Commercials are annoying on their own, but it is the choice viewers made to watch free TV (though this makes it hard to explain why people pay so much for cable). The free market will never kill loud commercials because the free market actually, though subconsciously, "wants" loud commercials. This has been verified countless times by market research, the tool companies use to determine the best action to take to increase sales.
The same reason is why spammers and telemarketers make a good-enough profit in spite of the fact that most people find it annoying. For spammers the cost of "proper" and "polite" marketing is much higher than the cost of spam for an equivalent volume of sales.
This is why regulation exists, because in the long run the "free market" causes a certain amount of waste and damage. If the waste and damage is not significant enough to impede the "free market", then the "free market" will continue with the waste and damage. If only 10% of the world's population has to suffer through war, famine, disease, pollution, loud commercials, and misery, then the "free market" will continue in this distruction unless the amount of damage is so bad that it works against the market. This is what we would then call a market correction, but the correction would only restore conditions that are most suitable to the market, all human suffering aside.
On the other hand, if people or governments interfere with the "free market" and impose regulations to reduce this damage, say from 10% to 2%, then there is the potential for a better world that the "free market" could never deliver. Of course, this interference is not without its risks and tradeoffs, but modest and well planned regulation can improve life for most people.
My job required me to frequently travel to Europe, but I told them I would only go by boat. However, they rejected the boat option, so I quit and went back to my first job flipping burgers. I would have gone to my second or third job, but manufacturing and telemarketing is now done overseas. But I feel so much more empowered sticking it to the Man. Do you want fries with that?
1. The child will counter-sue for the life-long emotional trauma inflicted onto a 6 year old by a vicous lawyer placing the guilt of an old lady passing away onto the poor kid.
2. Parents will keep their kids locked up in the house wrapped in bubble wrap until they are free to emerge into the world like an 18 year old butterfly. Then you will have 200 lb 18 year olds on training wheels running into old ladies. This will only increase the number of fatalities.
3. Child obesity will soar. "No way dad! I'm not going to be one of those other irresponsible punk-ass 4-year olds that take chances with lives of random people on the side walk. Since I don't have any assets to pay for any damage I could reasonably forsee as a result of my presence among other individuals it would just be immoral for me to venture outside."
4. I will also throw myself in front of 87 year old ladies riding their Hoverounds. Given that the elderly tend to have slow reaction times I can be guaranteed to sustain some sort of injury as they run over me. And old ladies tend to have more assets than 4 year olds.
If just one "astronaut farmer" could get to mars, and upon arrival declare himself "King of the Planet" and refuse to pay tax to any earth bound government, then that would trigger every nation with a rocket program to head to Mars to establish a colony and snuff out any idea of libertarian personal sovereignty.
Or if a probe found evidence of life then the world super powers would be obliged to send in a force to eradicate the potential threat. We don't have a funding problem, we have a motivation problem.
So, is my bank card going to process this as just another transaction or am going to be hit with a "gold advance fee", usurious interest rates, and an "alternative currency transaction fee"?
Slashdot Mirror
The judge is not likely to care one way or the other. Like most public officials nowadays the judge will most likely care only about how his decisions from the bench will be perceived by his future employer, such as a lobbying group or a pro-industry arbitration firm.
If we both live in the same community and exchange similar goods and services with the members of the community, and I pay the required taxes, and you do not, you cannot figure out who is getting raped and pillaged? I have to drop my prices to compete with you, but you get to maintain your standard of living. As you grow richer, as a result of your low-handed, illegal, and unfair tax evasion tactics, you are able to buy more of what you want within the community. Perhaps you and I may bid against each other on a house, but you will be able to outbid me because of all the cash you have illegally accumulated. And after you buy this house, and other goods and services from the community, you drive up the prices. And since property tax is also based on value in most communities, I end up paying even more taxes because the new house you bought down the street raised the average value of all the other houses on the street.
I don't equate lawfull and ethical business practices with "raping and pillaging," but when you've seen what corruption, theft, and organized crime can do to a community, I don't know of a more fitting word.
US citizens have to report the institutions and account numbers for any funds held outside the US if the combined total exceeeds $10k. This requirement even extends to beneficiaries of trust funds. You can use google to find the form if you don't believe me. This reporting is required even if there is no interest income or even if there is a net loss due to account maintenance costs, etc.
They might as well keep their money offshore since they're creating all of these jobs offshore anyway. Except for those tax evaders who hire illegal immigrants in the US. I guess that's a good thing. For somebody.
--
Comments may be biased from a U.S. middle class perspective.
Now that he is in the crosshairs of the US government am I the only one that sees Julian's actions as evidence that he has been turned into a double-agent, cooperating with his prosecutors for a reduced sentence? It's not as if the US government hasn't been trying to uncover the identies of these Swiss account holders, right?
It almost reminds me of when the Napster boys settled their lawsuit with the RIAA by agreeing to hand over the identities of their customers so that the RIAA could spread their reign of terror by suing single mothers, homeless men, and elderly shut-ins for the balance of their life savings and potential future earnings.
If they're weathly enough to have a Swiss bank account then they are wealthy enough to LEAVE. If they're so concerned about protecting their families from the evil tax collector, then we are better off without them. In the US, for anyone with enough cash worth protecting there are plenty of legal ways to structure assets to reduce tax obligations and other risks - just consult an attorney specializing in estate planning, asset protection, or tax law. As a middle class American I can't participate and in that sense I don't think it's fair for these loopholes to exist, but they are legal, so I don't see a problem when people choose these options.
But there is a special class of "rich" that likes to bitch and moan, and they have no problem with flagrantly violating the law to hide assets overseas. They will always complain but they will never leave as long as the raping and pillaging is so profitable.
So what's *after* that to really excite us?
How about MS Windows 3D on the 800GHz Intel Quantum Processor with superconducting high speed bus, including 256TB of Spintronic RAM powered by a single 0.2VDC supercap. There's always something on the horizon to get excited about.
Reminds me of when the US Patent Office declared "everything that could have been invented has been patented." That was in the mid 1800's.
This is rediculous. Are all of the ladies who recognize themselves on upskirt.com going to sue them as well? Where do you draw the line?
Sorry, my stance is this: If it's publicly viewable it's fair game. That's why I wear pants and dry my laundry in a clothes dryer.
You are referring to the US. The article is about the UN.
I honestly believe that the internet has the capacity to empower basic human freedoms more than any other development in history, even the printing press. The Open Source movement is just one example of how the internet can take long established and universally accepted theories of capitalism, commerce, production, distribution, patents and copyrights and turn it on its head.
However, there are two major weaknesses of the internet. First, it is dependent on semiconductor technology, which to my knowledge even the most talented home-brew geek cannot fabricate in his garage. At best he could program an FPGA, but he still needs a massive silicon foundry and the associated supply chain of toxic chemicals and kilojoules of energy to supply his components. If the "powers that be" can control the supply of microprocessors (or worse, sneak malicious tracking or blocking circuitry into the chips) then they can (theoretically) control and regulate the flow of information over the internet.
Second is that the internet is still largely dependent on the fiber put in place by some of the world's most powerful corporations. It is this fiber that is the target of government surveillance and regulation.
While the "home brew" microchip does not seem to be on the horizon, the potential for neighbors to connect directly to each other in an ad-hoc, free (as in speech and in beer [except for the hardware]), and unregulated manner does seem to be feasible, but as the threat of severe censorship is not yet upon us there is little incentive for such a self organizing network to get off the ground. The key to such a network is that it needs to be completely independent from providers of infrastructure, which would include cable, phone, and cellular networks. If anyone knows of any projects in the works I would be interested in getting involved.
Ultimately I think one of the best ways to dispose of tyranny is to render such powers as redundant and impotent. Once a population doesn't benefit from or rely on their government then the government is seen only as an oppressor. Most colonial territories are now independent nations for this very reason. Sometimes peacefully, sometimes not.
As for the UN, I find it interesting that in this modern world we have a United Nations and we have a United States and a United Kingdom, but there does not exist a "United Peoples". Perhaps if such an entity could form then the tyranny of nation-states could come to an end.
Inconceivable!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Conservative idiots tend to get their information from Fox News and talk radio. Conservative by nature they resist change and still don't have internet access. Majority of conservative idiots live in the boonies where there is no internet available. Satellite is everywhere so they get that. As for radio, if you've ever driven through the boonies then you know what I mean - there are only two types of radio channels: country music and religion.
That said, liberal idiots quickly adapt to change so we all get our news from online news sources such as Slashdot, which posts articles from The Guardian, Solon.com and other "fair-and-balanced" news sources. As far as idiots go, the "show me the birth certificate" crowd is just as whacked as the "911 was an inside job" crowd.
Just cover the logo with a generic tag. If the buyer removes the tag and exposes the logo, that's their problem.
He will soon regret pledging his fortune away when he finds out that he could have used that money to create mice from 2 fathers.
http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdot/~3/1NnJOhmfGAs/story01.htm
That's it! I'm going back to Geocities!
The only problem with that theory is that an "acceptable" percentage of people will watch the shows and buy the products dispite the annoying loud commercials. Commercials are annoying on their own, but it is the choice viewers made to watch free TV (though this makes it hard to explain why people pay so much for cable). The free market will never kill loud commercials because the free market actually, though subconsciously, "wants" loud commercials. This has been verified countless times by market research, the tool companies use to determine the best action to take to increase sales.
The same reason is why spammers and telemarketers make a good-enough profit in spite of the fact that most people find it annoying. For spammers the cost of "proper" and "polite" marketing is much higher than the cost of spam for an equivalent volume of sales.
This is why regulation exists, because in the long run the "free market" causes a certain amount of waste and damage. If the waste and damage is not significant enough to impede the "free market", then the "free market" will continue with the waste and damage. If only 10% of the world's population has to suffer through war, famine, disease, pollution, loud commercials, and misery, then the "free market" will continue in this distruction unless the amount of damage is so bad that it works against the market. This is what we would then call a market correction, but the correction would only restore conditions that are most suitable to the market, all human suffering aside.
On the other hand, if people or governments interfere with the "free market" and impose regulations to reduce this damage, say from 10% to 2%, then there is the potential for a better world that the "free market" could never deliver. Of course, this interference is not without its risks and tradeoffs, but modest and well planned regulation can improve life for most people.
If I have to be frisked shouldn't I at least have the right to choose the hot chick with the handcuffs to search me?
Amen Brother!
My job required me to frequently travel to Europe, but I told them I would only go by boat. However, they rejected the boat option, so I quit and went back to my first job flipping burgers. I would have gone to my second or third job, but manufacturing and telemarketing is now done overseas. But I feel so much more empowered sticking it to the Man. Do you want fries with that?
So from now on "how it's hanging" will be a verifiable public record.
Always practice safe USB intercourse. Here's your condom:
www.yankodesign.com/.../condom-protects-you-from-viruses/
if the child is found liable:
1. The child will counter-sue for the life-long emotional trauma inflicted onto a 6 year old by a vicous lawyer placing the guilt of an old lady passing away onto the poor kid.
2. Parents will keep their kids locked up in the house wrapped in bubble wrap until they are free to emerge into the world like an 18 year old butterfly. Then you will have 200 lb 18 year olds on training wheels running into old ladies. This will only increase the number of fatalities.
3. Child obesity will soar. "No way dad! I'm not going to be one of those other irresponsible punk-ass 4-year olds that take chances with lives of random people on the side walk. Since I don't have any assets to pay for any damage I could reasonably forsee as a result of my presence among other individuals it would just be immoral for me to venture outside."
4. I will also throw myself in front of 87 year old ladies riding their Hoverounds. Given that the elderly tend to have slow reaction times I can be guaranteed to sustain some sort of injury as they run over me. And old ladies tend to have more assets than 4 year olds.
If just one "astronaut farmer" could get to mars, and upon arrival declare himself "King of the Planet" and refuse to pay tax to any earth bound government, then that would trigger every nation with a rocket program to head to Mars to establish a colony and snuff out any idea of libertarian personal sovereignty.
Or if a probe found evidence of life then the world super powers would be obliged to send in a force to eradicate the potential threat. We don't have a funding problem, we have a motivation problem.
A crack dealer will give away free samples to obtain and retain a customer......
You stole my thunder. That's exactly what I was thinking when I read the headline.
$0.25 in the year 1975 has the same purchase power as $1 in the year 2009.
Forget gold, give me an ATM that dispenses those 1975 quarters!
So, is my bank card going to process this as just another transaction or am going to be hit with a "gold advance fee", usurious interest rates, and an "alternative currency transaction fee"?