WOWO v Pinocchio: Whose Nose Grows Fastest?

[edeevee]

I should figure out a way so my radio never lands on that station. But since I haven't done that (yet) my search button does settle there occasionally. And sometimes what I'm hearing is so unbe-flipping-lievable that I stay there for a few moments. Such was the case yesterday afternoon.

The conservative host du jour, Casey Whatshisname, was shouting at a caller when the station came on. SHOUTING. To be fair, the caller was shouting too -- but he's not a professional radio host. It had something to do with Romney's accounts in the Cayman Islands and Casey Whosit was determined to prove that the caller had a pension fund (which, um, he did not). Casey was doubly incensed because he was on location and therefore could not hit the mute button on his own. Ohmigosh! He was forced to listen to a caller! It's a travesty, I tell ya.

Eventually someone at the studio kicked the caller off but Casey Whosehisface KEPT YELLING. He was hysterical in his efforts to make it known that: A. EVERYBODY has money in the Cayman Islands B. Or, err, at least EVERYBODY with a pension fund. C. OBAMA HAS MONEY IN THE CAYMAN ISLANDS D. EVERYBODY can open an account there if they want. E. It's EASY. F. There is NOTHING illegal or IMMORAL about it. G. And ANYBODY who doesn't BELIEVE HIM can go SUCK ONE -- okay, so not really on that last part. What he really said was: ANYBODY who doesn't BELIEVE HIM doesn't know ANYTHING about finances. H. And besides -- OBAMA HAS MONEY IN THE CAYMAN ISLANDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!zomg!!

This sounded dubious to me since I was pretty sure _I_ didn't have money in the Cayman Islands, and I'm somebody, right? So I decided to investigate.

The first thing I found out is that investigating anything about banking in the Caymans is frustrating. They have this annoying habit of keeping secrets. So, while I could find out that, yes, SOME US pension funds invest in equity firms -and other mechanisms like them- in the Cayman Islands, I could not find out how many. I am still reasonably certain that the percentage of pensions that invest there does not = ALL.

What about Obama? Casey Whoever was so sure Obama has money in the Caymans that he SHOUTED it. TWICE. But. After ten pages of Google search, the only one I could come up with who was suggesting that Obama has money there was Rush Limbaugh.

Can EVERYBODY open an account in the Cayman Islands and is it EASY? No. And no. I found a list of Cayman banks and set to researching how to open an account in them. You have to have a passport. And a driver's license. That leaves quite a few people out. You have to have a "banking relationship" of more than six months with a bank somewhere else and that bank has to send a statement detailing your average balances and withdrawal history. You have to have money. Lots of it in most cases. Of all the banks I checked, only one allows you to start an account with "just" $1000 and does not require a minimum monthly balance -- and that's only if your mama or papa also has an account there and you are under 18. Some of them won't tell you what the minimum starting deposit or the minimum balance is. They invite you to call and speak to their representative to see if you meet "qualifications". Two banks. Two. Out of a gazillion. Say you can start an account there with the modest sum of $5000. The others I checked (who will say upfront) require $120,000, $300,000, $500,000 ... or more. When you consider that a recent study shows that 23.4% of US families have NO liquid assets (that's NO money in checking or savings accounts, money market funds, CD’s, treasury bills, or government savings bonds) and another 18.2 % have less that $1500 in assets that pretty much shows that ALMOST HALF of Americans could NOT open an account in the Cayman Islands.

Casey Whatshismouth did have one thing to say that turns out to be true. If you invest in a regualr savings account in the Cayman Isalnds with money that you earned in the US, it has already been taxed. You're not getting over on anybody with that money. What he doesn't say is - UNTIL IT EARNS INTEREST. That interest is not taxed by the Cayman government. It is not taxed by the US government either. But if interest was all it could earn, I'd - well, no, I'd still be ticked about it - but interest is NOT all your money can earn. It is possible, though maybe not entirely legal, to invest the money in your offshore savings account in stock in US companies and the money those stocks earn might not be taxable either.

At least that's what I'm learning about Romney's 100 million dollar IRA account. HUNDRED MILLION DOLLAR IRA. Yeah, he has one. In the Caymans. While most of us poor schlubs are limited to stashing no more than $6K a year in an IRA, Mitt's figured out how to grow his into a freaking separate fortune. Tax free. And here's how he did it:

Remember when I told you about Cambridge Industries? About how they made sweetheart deals with the previous owners and important stockholders so they wouldn't squawk when Bain milked the company of all its cash then forced it into bankruptcy? I didn't think it was a big deal at the time but there was this weird stuff about stocks in the agreements. Certain people, the owner, CEO, some stockholders and Bainies would be issued stocks as compensation. Some of those stocks would be valued at $X and other stocks would be valued at $XXXX. I didn't understand yet why someone would want so much of the stock that was valued at such a lower price. Now I know.

They take those stocks, the ones "worth" $X and put them in an IRA, in the Cayman Islands, so they won't be taxed. And then, as soon as they are safely hidden away, they sell those stocks for their true value. The initial stock is not taxed because it's going in an IRA. The thousand times more value of the stocks after they are sold is not taxed because it's in an IRA in the Caymans. There is no $6K limit per year because they undervalue the stock at the beginning. Are you still with me? That *ahem* $6K worth of stock becomes $6 million overnight. As stock sold from a US company this should have been taxed at a rate of 35 to 40%, with an additional 10.4% (up to $110K) for Social Security and 2.9% for Medicare. Mitt did this often enough to grow ONE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS TAX FREE. If yoy are keeping count, that's 35 million he DIDN'T PAY in Fedral Income Tax and 2.9 milllion he DIDN'T PAY into Medicare. And this is only ONE account. He and his Bain associates own 138 accounts in the Cayman Islands. They own accounts in Bermuda too. It's all (probably) legal and it is all (certainly) genius.

But it's evil genius. Because every dollar the Romneys in this country do not pay in taxes has to be made up by someone else. Like me. Or you. Or our kids. Or our parents.

And even that is not enough for them. They want us to give them even more. They want to pay even less taxes. And they want to pay for it by cutting the Medicaid that keeps our grandparents cared for in nursing facilities, or Head Start and childcare subsidies that allow poor young parents to work, or the health care that makes it possible for my ex-cancer kid to finally have insurance, or food stamps that help insure that every one of us gets to eat. All so they can have more and the rest of us can wait and wait and wait while people die, still waiting for some of that to trickle down on us. Right now, the only thing trickling is the vomit that seeps from the corner of my mouth as I realize how truly vile these people are.

I don't know whether Casey Whatshiswhoosit from WOWO is just so arrogant that he never questions anything his party says and therefore stays willfully ignorant, or if he does know it and just doesnt care. I have to thank him though. Because now I KNOW IT. And I'm telling everyone. I hope you will too.

[Mr Douglas]

I don't think the people you're trying to express this to are really into facts, edeevee. They go by their gut, 'buzzwords', and when that fails they'll ask you why you hate 'Merica.
I wouldn't vote for Rombama or Obamney, but the crooks are always the crooks, and if they're the new 'annointed' one, you might as well forget challenging anything with facts.

"Hi! I'm Satan!....YEEESS, that guy! I know you've heard a lot of bad things about me, but my friends at WZIO and Fox "news" are smoothing that over for me, and they BETTER after making me walk around Jerusalem for three days wearing that dorky kippah, and fake praying for the cameras! I'm this years (R) issued candidate for president. I know, I used to be a member of that other horrible party, but had a very convenient change of heart. Crazy, isn't it? For president! Some may think the (R)'s standards must have gotten pretty low, or maybe that it's all rigged by the rich and powerful. Well, they're right, and I certainly couldn't care less about anybody, much less their rights and futures, but I have learned to be semi-sincere for the cameras when it comes to all that nonsense. What I can promise you is more perpetual war, and continued deterioration of your money and Constitution. Heck, we might even amp it up a little bit.... So what do you say? Vote for me?"

"AWW, I dunno, .....SURE! As long as you got that there (R) after yer name. I hate them darned socialists, and gun grabbers! I'm sure glad Fox "news" straightened out for me that yer nuthin' like that!"

[HoosierHelen]

Thank you Edeevee for sharing your research with us. You have presented your findings in such a way that I believe most of us are most capable of understanding. Your research is being forwarded to my list of friends on my e-mail account. I continue to admire & respect your ability to communicate concepts such as this. Thanks for your efforts. They ARE being shared.

[LuciusBeebe]

Do you think its wrong to avoid paying taxes, if it is legal to do so?

[Mr Douglas]

Do you think its wrong to avoid paying taxes, if it is legal to do so?

They can, have and will print more, so legal or not, no big deal.
monopoly money.jpg

[edeevee]

I don't think the people you're trying to express this to are really into facts, edeevee. They go by their gut, 'buzzwords', and when that fails they'll ask you why you hate 'Merica.
I wouldn't vote for Rombama or Obamney, but the crooks are always the crooks, and if they're the new 'annointed' one, you might as well forget challenging anything with facts.

"Hi! I'm Satan!....YEEESS, that guy! I know you've heard a lot of bad things about me, but my friends at WZIO and Fox "news" are smoothing that over for me, and they BETTER after making me walk around Jerusalem for three days wearing that dorky kippah, and fake praying for the cameras! I'm this years (R) issued candidate for president. I know, I used to be a member of that other horrible party, but had a very convenient change of heart. Crazy, isn't it? For president! Some may think the (R)'s standards must have gotten pretty low, or maybe that it's all rigged by the rich and powerful. Well, they're right, and I certainly couldn't care less about anybody, much less their rights and futures, but I have learned to be semi-sincere for the cameras when it comes to all that nonsense. What I can promise you is more perpetual war, and continued deterioration of your money and Constitution. Heck, we might even amp it up a little bit.... So what do you say? Vote for me?"

"AWW, I dunno, .....SURE! As long as you got that there (R) after yer name. I hate them darned socialists, and gun grabbers! I'm sure glad Fox "news" straightened out for me that yer nuthin' like that!"

Mr. D, I think I understand your frustration and, while I think Obama is a good choice, if he doesn't pass the smell test for you, then he doesn't. You have my blessing to vote your conscience. Lord knows I've thrown more than one vote away on someone who had no chance of winning. I did it so I could sleep at night and look myself in the mirror in the morning.

[edeevee]

Thank you Edeevee for sharing your research with us. You have presented your findings in such a way that I believe most of us are most capable of understanding. Your research is being forwarded to my list of friends on my e-mail account. I continue to admire & respect your ability to communicate concepts such as this. Thanks for your efforts. They ARE being shared.

Thank YOU, Helen. Knowing that people like you are reading and taking my thoughts to heart makes all that research more than worth it.

[LuciusBeebe]

They can, have and will print more, so legal or not, no big deal.
monopoly money.jpg

I read this thread many times. I wrote, deleted, wrote, and deleted more. And what you have from me above is the crux of my thoughts.

Is it wrong to avoid paying taxes?

[edeevee]

Do you think its wrong to avoid paying taxes, if it is legal to do so?

Yes. And no. But mostly yes.

I think there are things that most of us agree are good for our country so we choose to incentivise those behaviors through our tax code. Those are things like home ownership, putting our kids through school, making our homes and businesses more energy efficient, saving for retirement. I don't think it is wrong to passively take advantage of those opportunities. It's tit for tat. You do something good; you get rewarded.

Even reduced taxes for Capital Gains. I can get behind that. For our economy to grow we need people to start new businesses and invest in those businesses. That involves risk, and risk - when reasonable - should also be rewarded.

But that's not what Romney did. Have you looked at Bain's history? After the first couple of years there was no longer any risk involved. It was all closed door deals between owners, upper management, important stock holders and Bain representatives who guaranteed the former and the latter would all get rich no matter what the ultimate consequences were to the companies and their workers and the "little guy" investors. If corporations are people then Bain is guilty of murder and Romney is the Hitman In Chief.

Whether it's manipulating stock values for offshore IRAs or taking deductions for pushing viable companies too far into debt, or ... or ... or ... almost none of what he's done are things that we would agree are good for the country. They are just free **** **** for the rich. And we're paying for them.

So yes. Mitt Romney, your taxes? You're doing it wrong.

[evilkumquat]

I read this thread many times. I wrote, deleted, wrote, and deleted more. And what you have from me above is the crux of my thoughts.

Is it wrong to avoid paying taxes?

It's not wrong paying only what you are legally required to pay.

Using your money and influence to get the rules changed to benefit people like you (and ONLY like you) is morally reprehensible.

Continuing to ask for even MORE cuts when you are already paying less than 15% or even zero percent is mindnumbingly evil.

[edeevee]

-

It's not wrong paying only what you are legally required to pay.

Using your money and influence to get the rules changed to benefit people like you (and ONLY like you) is morally reprehensible.

Continuing to ask for even MORE cuts when you are already paying less than 15% or even zero percent is mindnumbingly evil.

Mitt would say he's paying only what he's legally allowed to pay. And actually, Bain didn't pay lobbyists until 2007, long after Mitt left. I don't think that lets him off the hook though. I think the line, okay crevasse, he crossed has to do with intention. We don't buy our homes just to get the mortgage write off, or have children just to reduce our tax burden. But Mitt, from the moment he decided to incorporate Bain in Delaware, when he really does business in Massachusetts, to the forming of Sankaty in the Caymans to finance the mounting debts of Bain's acquisitions, to the purchase of severely undervalued stocks, to, probably the choice of socks he puts on in the morning -- EVERYTHING he (or the company that he he founded) does is completed with an eye toward legally cheating the citizens of our country out of tax revenue.

[LuciusBeebe]

EVERYTHING he (or the company that he he founded) does is completed with an eye toward legally cheating the citizens of our country out of tax revenue.

If its legal, how is it cheating?

[edeevee]

If its legal, how is it cheating?

It's cheating by bending the rules and using it to an advantage that the programs were not originally intended for. Example: In Cambridge's SEC statement they (with straight faces, I assume) say that they believe all stock issued reflects real value, yet some stock is issued at $300+ a share, some stock at $600+ a share, some stock at $1700+ a share -- and stock that is only available to the CEO, upper management, board members, certain bought-out previously interested parties (who promise not to sue the company) and Bain representatives is issued at ... wait for it ... $3.37 a share. Puh-leeze. By doing this it allows the privileged stock holders to skirt the $6,000 a year limit imposed on IRAs (and probably other programs that I'm not smart enough to know about). They can buy (or actually promise to buy - it's all done with notes so no cash changes hands until they realize their windfall) nearly 2000 shares at this reduced price, say it's worth less than 6K, not pay taxes on that 6K, stick it in an offshore IRA account, "invest" those shares by offering them for sale at the true market price, make a $3,066,685.00 profit, and not pay tax on that either -- all in a program designed to encourage working people to build a retirement fund to supplement their Social Security.

[evilkumquat]

If its legal, how is it cheating?

It's cheating when everyone knows it's cheating but they use their money and influence to keep the rule from getting fixed.

I'm sure there's a sports example somewhere, but not being a sport person, I have no idea.

Ahh, I know: doping in professional sports.

They draw up a list of banned substances because the goal of sports is to pit athletes against each other naturally. But some athletes keep finding substances or methods to skirt the rule (either finding new stuff to take or blood transfusions or any other actions not specifically prohibited) to give them an edge. Almost everyone would accept this as cheating, but technically "legal" only because the rules haven't been updated.

Just like taxes. Everyone knows everyone should pay their proper share based on income and ability to pay, or that IRAs are for normal middle class citizens to build up a retirement fund of a few hundred thousand dollars. But people like Romney are so determined to not give a ********* thing back to the country that made them rich, they abuse the system using loopholes unavailable to the majority of the rest of the country, and building IRAs a hundred times bigger than what they were originally intended.

[LuciusBeebe]

Sorry, I'm just not buying the "cheating" argument. The only way to cheat is to break the rules. If you avoid paying taxes LEGALLY you're not breaking the rules. If you don't like the rules, be mad at the rules. If I found a magical website that let me pay less income tax, you can bet I'd sign up.


I don't like Romney, but I don't blame him for trying to pay less in taxes.

[evilkumquat]

Sorry, I'm just not buying the "cheating" argument. The only way to cheat is to break the rules. If you avoid paying taxes LEGALLY you're not breaking the rules. If you don't like the rules, be mad at the rules. If I found a magical website that let me pay less income tax, you can bet I'd sign up.

I don't like Romney, but I don't blame him for trying to pay less in taxes.

Even though the reason he pays less is because he and his ilk have spent decades manipulating the tax code for him to "legally" do it?

[edeevee]

Sorry, I'm just not buying the "cheating" argument. The only way to cheat is to break the rules. If you avoid paying taxes LEGALLY you're not breaking the rules. If you don't like the rules, be mad at the rules. If I found a magical website that let me pay less income tax, you can bet I'd sign up.


I don't like Romney, but I don't blame him for trying to pay less in taxes.

I do blame him when he does it knowing others will have to make up his fair share. Plus, I find it galling that he would dare ask for even more preferential treatment in teh form of tax cuts that (when paid for) will benefit those exclusively in his financial class. And, to do that at the same time that he is asking us to choose him as our leader? The only place he's planning to lead us to is our own financial slaughter.

And Lucius, despite your libertarian, every man for himself leanings, I do not believe you would sign up for that magical website -- not if you had to look a poor family in the eyes as you did it and say, Sorry you're hungry but I found this cool Me First widget and I can only use it if I agree to cut food stamps! Or look a friend in the eye and say, I really feel bad about your grandpa with alzheimers but I want an extra couple of quarters so we'll have to cut the Medicaid that provides care for him. I don't think you could look me in the eye and tell me your slimy, bend the rules tax break is worth my ex-cancer kid losing his health insurance. You are a better man than that.

P.S. I don't like the rules even more than I don't like those who take advantage of them. The first step in changing the rules is to elect someone who doesn't think those rules are cool beans.

[LuciusBeebe]

Even though the reason he pays less is because he and his ilk have spent decades manipulating the tax code for him to "legally" do it?

If you're playing by the rules, you're not cheating.

your slimy, bend the rules tax break

Answer me this, Edee... use your imagination:

You are a professional baseball player. You can play in State A, which has 20% income tax... or you can play in State B, which has 10% income tax. You will make 10 million dollars next year.

Are you a cheater if you decide to play in State B, to keep an extra million dollars?

[HoosierHelen]

LB, Your logic is flawed in my opinion.

Of course we all know businesses are attracted to states and local areas where their tax rates are the lowest. I have absolutely no problem with this. I do have a problem when they begin to stretch reality and explain to me now that under the new rules (they expect to impose on us) will now declare corporations are people too. Corporations are separate entities, however, they have none of the body parts that humans share. (especially the heart). True some contribute in major ways to charities, and then swiftly deduct their contributions from their tax liabilities. Rather than pay Uncle Sam, they have chose where they want their money to be directed. I still have no problem with this.

Where any individual decides to declare his primary residence is the tax rate and tax laws he should be bound to. Of course in Romney's case he has the option of multiple residences, however, he chose a basement in his son's home in Mass as his primary residence so he could run for Governor there. Was he bending those rules just a tad? I think so...however...I am not a mega millionaire with the power to influence the rule makers with my donations to their campaigns.

How on earth you can defend the rights of the mega wealthy to drain even more tax dollars from the working class and the poor (because they are the rule makers and no one is strong enough individually to remove their greedy hands from the cookie jar) escapes me? What REALLY escapes me is the mentality of so many poor and working class citizens here in Indiana who so ready and willing to allow the wealthy to plunge their hands even deeper into our pockets with increased tax rates for us and even less taxes for the wealthy. Remember Regan's solution...'Trickle Down'? I never received even a dribble. The wealthy were purchasing new boats because their previous ones weren't large enough for their increased cash flows. Remember some politicians were suggesting a luxury tax for these big expenditures on the bigger boats? The wealthy didn't like that idea very much so..it was nixed by the real rule makers.

I honestly believe as the divide continues to deepen between the haves and the have nots, this country will suffer dearly for it. This is not the Republican party that Eisenhower would even recognize today. If the rules exist because of politicians being bought and paid for to create these rules....then...absolutely, this is cheating.

[LuciusBeebe]

Of course we all know businesses are attracted to states and local areas where their tax rates are the lowest. I have absolutely no problem with this.

Okay...

How on earth you can defend the rights of the mega wealthy to drain even more tax dollars from the working class and the poor (because they are the rule makers and no one is strong enough individually to remove their greedy hands from the cookie jar) escapes me?

Make up your mind, Helen. Does it make sense to avoid paying taxes, or is it robbing the poor? How is a company moving to a state with a lower tax rate ANY DIFFERENT from an individual having an off-shore account?

They're both dodging taxes.

Criminy. You say MY logic is flawed, then contradict yourself in your own post.

If the rules exist because of politicians being bought and paid for to create these rules....then...absolutely, this is cheating.

Cheating is breaking the rules. They're not breaking the rules.

That means its not cheating.

You can do exactly what they do. Anybody can. Don't like it? Change the rules. Until then, stop calling people who play by the rules cheaters. Come up with a better word.