The Panama Papers

If this accelerates the demise of David Cameron, I will be a very happy man.

Well the Iceland PM resigned pretty quick.

I know several reasons why people have offshore accounts. You know them in gar greater detail than I. I wasn't talking about people but a class of persons.

P. S. Do you by chance own a corporation in Wyoming, Delaware. Nevada or the American Virgin Islands?

Here in Brasil we are investigating those corruptions from goverment, and our police already detected that Mossack was related to offshores used to clean cash for political campaigns.

Im actually interested to see what important brazillian names can come from those papers.

Last I saw people from most of your political parties were mentioned.


Panama Papers: 57 people linked to Brazil's Petrobras scandal also feature in Mossack Fonseca leak
International Business Times.

Brazil politicians linked to offshore companies in Panama leaks: paper
Reuters.

Then again I really don't know how man parties you have.

If one has to explain what's obvious to all it must mean the person requesting is intentionally being obtuse. That or as you claim time and time again are CPA who takes advantages of weak tax laws for their wealthy clients. After all, you used the phrase "gaming the system" and "taking advantage of tax laws" in the same sentence indicating you are aware of the correlation.

However in other news Hilary Clinton's name has just turned up
in association to a Russian bank and lobbying group.

This could get interesting.

No. All of my holdings are in various partnerships with 1% GP LLCs. All registered in Texas.

Same set of legal protections, and Texas Franchise Tax allows for passive income to be non-taxable as long as it's greater than or equal to 90% of income. So, why bother with corporations out of state?

In other words, you don't have a damn clue about your personal code of ethics, nor how this falls anywhere near the term "unethical." Your argument of ethics on this is "I don't like this, so it must be unethical." You cannot or will not explain why it is unethical except for that sentence, because you just don't know.

Let me put it plainly for you: It is not unethical to have holdings outside your country. You still pay taxes on any income made from those holdings, either in the foreign taxes from the country it's in, or your home country that takes all worldwide income. At the end of the day, you still pay taxes. So, tax evasion couldn't possibly be an "unethical choice."

Legal standpoints depends on the country at question. You may want to build a factory or own a part of a company in a certain country, but that country in question requires that a specific ownership structure where the majority owner is a domestic citizen, so you are stuck in the minority, but you at least own a part of the company at question. Japan is a good example of that. China is another good example.

So, please tell me where is the ethics in that? And don't bring up your version of ethics into this, because it is obvious that you have a flawed sense of ethics.

So? I'm sure Trump has accounts that will show up in those "papers" also.

Should we protest? Riot? Become a mob mentality and loot/pillage hold a "peaceful protest" and liberate goods from those evil corporate owners?

Why would you require hard evidence to connect the dots here? Can't you see how the vast majority of those involved are government top officials/politicians?

Add to that having your wealth stored in the same place as the GCC region monarchs and it becomes glaringly obvious.

You are clearly focused on private individuals, whereas everyone else is commenting on public figures/politicians taking advantage of a system and behavior they are claiming to be trying to regulate and put an end to.

The rule of Law is a means to an end; Justice.
If the rule of law does not achieve justice, then the rule of law must be changed.
So to the brainwashed millennials who grew up online without any real life experience who don't posses the imagination to hypothesize about cause and effect need to leave the room and let the big boys and girls discuss this.

I'm tired of people derailing subjects as big as this one (the Panama papers) into a legal debate and not what it needs to be - a debate about what is right and wrong!

Would you like for me to connect the dots?

You are from Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia's religion of choice is Sunni Muslim. ISIS is composed of Muslims. Therefor, you must be a terrorist. How's that for connecting the dots?

Unless you have hard evidence, you cannot accuse anyone of doing anything you may think they are doing.

I'm not condoning what the Iceland politicians are doing. If they want to be hypocrites, so be it.

However, not everyone who uses that firm is a crook, nor most of those government officials are breaking their laws. There is no law for Russian officials to not own investment accounts.

So, you are bringing morals into this.

Explain, then, the morals into owning an investment account. Why is it so wrong to do so?

Because the people that have investment accounts are rich and being rich is evil. Have you not been paying attention?

Sorry Zeig but the vast majority of people mentioned in the Panama papers are people no one ever heard of.

Politicians are a small minority and high powered world leaders just cannot number even a thousand.

Take your country as a for instance. Most of the royal family, even the ones in politics, aren't leaders. Your king is a high powered world leader.

You are right. That's a pretty sweet deal.

What I get is why the media is making a big deal about this. Well, besides to stir the pot, create animosity (and possibly riots) which creates more stories which creates more revenue for the media.

Well, I guess that's one way of doing it. Control public opinion, and when it's a slow news day, cause international chaos and create more revenue for yourself. I wonder when people will learn that they are being played like the fiddles they are?

My bad. That's what happens when you don't bother to look into the details.

Still, my second point stands though (and you're probably in agreement).

GCC members of the royal family don't need to be direct leaders to steal money that will inevitably be stored in different places.

When you "connect the dots", you do that in a reasonable way, not an absurd leap of logic that can be dispelled by anyone in 2 sentences.

Ultimately I agree with you (and who doesn't?) on your main point; that the different media outletd compete at generating profits off the way they spin things. I was responding to a particular point in one of your previous posts.

Thanks for the lesson in logic, Kingnobody. All terrorists drink water. Water must be eliminated to destroy the terrorists.

I don't think you should be quoting my post if you're responding to KN.

Also, KN, I forgot to add, I agree with your concerns over the privacy issue.

While I did attack you based by your location, you did the same based by my social status.

I don't use that firm, but I use firms like them. You basically called me a crook in your "connect the dots" post. I wanted to point out that the same can be made with anything.

People who use such services, regardless of their position in life, are not there to hide money or for illegitimate reasons, like you think they do. If you want to accuse somebody of fraud, theft, and money laundering, you better have some evidence to prove it.

You're not a politician, not even a minor celebrity. I don't see how my comment could've been perceived as an attack.

Because politicians and minor celebrities aren't the only ones who commit fraud. Most people who commit fraud are those you never even heard of before.

You still haven't shown any evidence, hard or circumstantial, as to their guilt. Guilt by association doesn't fly for the rest of the world, by the way.

This coming from the guy who regularly bashes middle easterners and muslims because ISIS?

That aside, politicians and law makers are held up to a higher standard because they are entrusted with protecting the interests of the people. It is an abuse of power to gain personally because of the office one holds. Someone lying on their tax returns isn't the same as heads of state embezzling millions/billions through offshore accounts.

No I don't. I most certainly do not judge an entire culture because of a few bad apples.

Because I know how easy for people outside the US to judge America and Americans based by our politicians and Hollywood. I certainly don't want to be compared to Paris Hilton!

Right, but just because those offshore accounts exist doesn't mean that politician is embezzling anything from the country they hold office in.

I wouldn't be surprised if Obama holds offshore accounts (actually, it doesn't look like he owns any directly, according to this source).

But you cannot accuse anyone of anything without evidence to back it up. I could accuse you of sleeping with pigs if that's the case.

Something fraudulent going on here... or perhaps a guilty conscious?
;)

The PM of Iceland resigned imminently after he was cornered about information revealed in the Panama papers.

Russia today is on full Damage control mode trying to deflect the public spot light away from Putin.

I think you're not understanding what an offshore account, in a tax haven, for a politician means. That's why maybe you're underestimating just how devastating it is to a politician or head of state to have one.

The western media always goes after African politicians and military figures for much much less evidence than what is available in the panama papers.

Nobody said, or tried to insinuate, that everyone involved or using such firms is suspicious of fraud. Why do you keep going back to that?

When it comes to politicians and the extremely rich, people have obvious reasons to cast doubts.

As for the bolded part, I know my country's flag bothers you, but you have a tendency of trying to turn any decent discussion into an argument by bringing up irrelevant nonsense. Try debating and exchanging PoV's instead of arguing, make your focus arriving at truth rather than triumphantly walking away.

I'm done with you.

Iceland has specific laws regarding investment accounts. This looks very bad for the PM because he helped write those laws (or at the very least, pretended to enforce them).


That's because people who don't know better (i.e. you) are attacking Putin for having something that is not illegal in Russia to have.

Only in certain countries where politicians have made their campaigns on attacking investors and foreign investments (i.e. Iceland and South America) would it look bad to have offshore accounts.

Oh hey, guess who's reporting the whole "Panama Papers Scandal." That's right, the western media.

They are creating chaos to get people to create more chaos (i.e. riots and removing heads of state) to sell more stories. The real story is: Why isn't anyone going after the hackers who broke into a private company and released private and personal information to the media? Why is the media protecting said hackers?