With all the back and forth sometimes the point of the thread, and the point of discussion is lost, so let me restate my point. I don't think the rich are immoral for using tax havens. I put no value judgement what-so-ever on doing this stuff. If I was rich, I'd do the same thing.
My position is that letting rich people put their money in tax havens is bad for the United States Economy, and the United States is stupid for letting so much money leave our economy.
Because you were spouting the usual nonsense about some 'better way' someone's 100 million is supposed to be spread through the economy.
None of these things have a thing to do with each other, or anything I was saying. You're just tossing shit up to see what sticks at this point.
The point is that a single rich person can't possibly spend a $100 million dollars, while many not as rich people can spend $1000 dollars. It is better for the economy to have many well-off people then a single super rich one.
According to the usual tax and spend morons who're always pretending to manage everyone else's money, rich people only pay capital gains taxes. If you're paying capital gains taxes, then that's taxes on... *drumroll.....* capital gains! That means money you've invested and realized a profit on, or on the profit from the sale of property. That doesn't mean all your money is in the Caymans. But of course, when people are fantasy-managing other people's money, they can have things both ways, sideways, upside down, backward and whatever way they want to fantasize about.
You're setting up a strawman. I've never said rich people ONLY pay Capital Gains tax, most people pay many kind of taxes such as sales taxes, property taxes, and income tax. Paying one doesn't mean that you don't pay for the others.
Saying I had milk for breakfast doesn't preclude me from also having eggs or pancakes. We're just talking about the milk for the moment.
As for putting money in offshore accounts and keeping as much of it out of the hands of busibody tax-and-spend losers, (or if a foreign investor, not bringing it here in the first place) I don't blame ANYONE for keeping their money out of the hands of greedy, stupid dimbulbs in this country. People in this country embracing a sub-third world culture of complete stupidity and ignorance are signaling to the financial world that they're forfeiting dibs on benefiting from any of that economic activity. There are other people throughout the world that are evolving in the other direction that more and more every day are demonstrating that they are a better bet.
Until our nation comes back to its senses and stops breeding and coddling dimbulbs en masse, I'm all for this.
You are confusing what's best for Rich People with what's best for the economy. If it was in my best interest to put my money in an off-shore account, I would do so in a heartbeat. At the same time you have to admit that it is bad for the American economy to have the rich put their money in a tax-haven. You play by the rules that exist, it doesn't mean you approve of the rules, or think they shouldn't be changed.
Thats just a silly example you purposefully picked to make your point work. Most anyone with a decent amount of money invested doesn't just have it in gold stashed under the bed, they have a mix of stocks and bonds and such, along with hard assets.
Again, your "gold as the only investment vehicle" example is just silly. Anyone with 100 million invested in stocks is doing a FUCK-TON more that's building up companies that money is invested in than your example of a bunch of people spending $1,000 ONE TIME.
Again, you're claiming absolutes when there isn't one. The hypothetical goldbug could invest in stocks AND buy gold. Someone can have money in a local bank AND a Cayman Island account. Someone can invest in stocks, buy gold, have cash, and have a Cayman Island account. Just because you do one thing doesn't mean you can't do other stuff. Just because someone had milk for breakfast doesn't mean they can't have a bagel and cereal too. But we're not talking about the bagel and cereal, we're talking about milk.
Confusing financial investment with economic investment is a real thing that's being done in this very thread. Investing in gold might be beneficial for you, but it's bad for the economy. You're right, I chose Gold because it's a well-known financial investment vehicle that's bad for the economy. Our hypothetical millionaire could be making tons of good economic investments and be a net plus for the economy, but all of his gold investments are and will be a loss for the economy, even if they turn out to be beneficial for him.
LOL! Okay, I give up. You're pretty clueless.
Sigh,
The Paradox of Thrift is a well-known part of economic theory.
Again, I think you're confusing what's best for you, with what's best for the economy. I save money because, frankly, it'd be stupid for me not to. It's obvious that saving money is great for me.
At the same time, saving money removes the money from circulation. Removing money from circulation is BAD for the economy. Circulating money (i.e. spending it) is good for the economy. This is basic economic theory, first semester conversations.