Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Structural studies of the global networks exposed in the Panama papers

doi.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 98 posts

Re: Structural studies of the global networks exposed in the Panama papers

#81

Post by nickpp »

csb6 wrote: post #29
vmception wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The movie was simplistic bullshit where every situation was nefarious broken people instead of the everyman that uses and would use these entity structures

Sure, non-wealthy people own stocks. But right now, the richest 10% of American households own 84% of the value of all stocks owned by Americans [1]. It is clear that the wealthy benefit massively from these structures and have much more use and access to them than the "everyman", who in the U.S. probably lives paycheck-to-paycheck. The fantasy that the "everyman" is this cowboy investor and broker is ridiculous and…

Having a pension actually means (indirectly) owning stocks too.

Re: Structural studies of the global networks exposed in the Panama papers

#82

Post by FandangoRanger »

nobody9999 wrote: post #39
FandangoRanger wrote: post #32

Hey where can independent researchers obtain the Panama Papers? I don’t think people can be expected to simply “trust us guys.”

>Hey where can independent researchers obtain the Panama Papers? I don’t think people can be expected to simply “trust us guys.” Footnote 5 of the paper in the submission provides a link to the data used. For your convenience, that link is: https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/pages/database I look forward to reading your paper when it's complete.

No I mean, the entire dataset. It's being jealously guarded by the "free" press.

Re: Structural studies of the global networks exposed in the Panama papers

#83

Post by powerapple »

jariel wrote: post #16

The Panama papers really only make sense in the context of multinationals operating from regimes with some degree of transparency, i.e. the West, Japan, Singapore etc.. 'Most' of the problems are in regimes where everything is nicely hidden i.e. Dubai, Moscow, anywhere in China. Why would anyone do banking in Dubai, where there are absolute Monarchs who can do whatever, whenever, with their money, finances informatio…

I would expect people in Dubai, Moscow and China put their money in the WEST. How much money go to London every year? How much money go to Sydney? And Vancouver? Money will go to the so-called cities with transparency.

Re: Structural studies of the global networks exposed in the Panama papers

#84

Post by csb6 »

vmception wrote: post #59
csb6 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, non-wealthy people own stocks. But right now, the richest 10% of American households own 84% of the value of all stocks owned by Americans [1]. It is clear that the wealthy benefit massively from these structures and have much more use and access to them than the "everyman", who in the U.S. probably lives paycheck-to-paycheck. The fantasy that the "everyman" is this cowboy investor and broker is ridiculous and…

But they absolutely will drive to the next county to get cheaper gas or lower property taxes and it is the same concept. Eventually you get to level up to the place of tax deferral that is infinite. You can do it onshore you can do if offshore. It is only hubris for some people to think some governments of their own choosing should have a piece of that. We are talking about the distinctly non corrupt activities.

> It is only hubris for some people to think some governments of their own choosing should have a piece of that

It is not hubris. It is pragmatics. Moving to another county does not fully avoid contributing to the community where you live; you aren’t leaving the state, so state taxes still apply. The point is that rich people should pay their fair share of taxes and not be able to just buy their way out of it with fancy lawyers and accountants, thereby depriving governments of billions in taxes. This analogy just isn’t on the same order of magnitude.

However, I think our philosophies are too different for you to accept my argument because it rests on the premise that rich people should pay taxes, which I don’t think you believe. It seems to me that you believe that individuals can and should avoid contributing to their communities through taxation as much as they possibly can. No matter that this money is often used for social services and other non-profitable activities that help people in need.

I think the atomized, “I got mine” attitude meshes deeply with the “temporarily embarrassed millionaire” attitude that tries to justify the Panama Papers stuff as on the same order of magnitude as getting cheap gas in another county. The concept of community doesn’t exist in this mindset; only a group of dragons sitting on their hoards whose sole interactions with each other are business transactions exists. I hope that changes.

Re: Structural studies of the global networks exposed in the Panama papers

#85

Post by csb6 »

nickpp wrote: post #81
csb6 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, non-wealthy people own stocks. But right now, the richest 10% of American households own 84% of the value of all stocks owned by Americans [1]. It is clear that the wealthy benefit massively from these structures and have much more use and access to them than the "everyman", who in the U.S. probably lives paycheck-to-paycheck. The fantasy that the "everyman" is this cowboy investor and broker is ridiculous and…

Having a pension actually means (indirectly) owning stocks too.

That statistic I cited includes pension funds.

Re: Structural studies of the global networks exposed in the Panama papers

#86

Post by vmception »

csb6 wrote: post #84
vmception wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they absolutely will drive to the next county to get cheaper gas or lower property taxes and it is the same concept. Eventually you get to level up to the place of tax deferral that is infinite. You can do it onshore you can do if offshore. It is only hubris for some people to think some governments of their own choosing should have a piece of that. We are talking about the distinctly non corrupt activities.

> It is only hubris for some people to think some governments of their own choosing should have a piece of that It is not hubris. It is pragmatics. Moving to another county does not fully avoid contributing to the community where you live; you aren’t leaving the state, so state taxes still apply. The point is that rich people should pay their fair share of taxes and not be able to just buy their way out of it with fa…

As someone that knows exactly what the “fancy lawyers and accountants” do, I think your argument is just far too simplistic and I think you could never get an effective public policy change because you don’t know whats really going on in the implementation, you react to the results.

To me the argument is “I’m mad we arent getting hosed equally” and rationalizing a phantom role of the state as if the state’s revenues would really improve and as if they would fund that infrastructure properly and that the infrastructure really had a meaningful effect on that wealthy person’s ability to do business reliably - or even keep the area safe and productive via improved social services. To which I would say thats all overestimated, and the state’s revenue sources should be reevaluated.

Re: Structural studies of the global networks exposed in the Panama papers

#87

Post by jariel »

powerapple wrote: post #83
jariel wrote: post #16

The Panama papers really only make sense in the context of multinationals operating from regimes with some degree of transparency, i.e. the West, Japan, Singapore etc.. 'Most' of the problems are in regimes where everything is nicely hidden i.e. Dubai, Moscow, anywhere in China. Why would anyone do banking in Dubai, where there are absolute Monarchs who can do whatever, whenever, with their money, finances informatio…

I would expect people in Dubai, Moscow and China put their money in the WEST. How much money go to London every year? How much money go to Sydney? And Vancouver? Money will go to the so-called cities with transparency.

People in Russia and China put their money in the West for it to be safe from their own corrupt regime, otherwise, they don't want transparency.

And Dubai, definitely, is the place to keep dirty money.

If it can be cleaned, and someone has legit cover for their money, they can keep it in the West.

Re: Structural studies of the global networks exposed in the Panama papers

#88

Post by stevenjohns »

hestefisk wrote: post #63
stevenjohns wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're missing out on the significant unemployment in countries like Sweden. There is significantly better free healthcare in Australia - which has an average tax rate of 23.6%. The correlation of high taxes = better quality of life doesn't hold much strength when you consider that there are plenty of countries doing well without it, and plenty of countries with high taxes that have a poor quality of life.

I’m Australian and my personal income tax rate is not 24%, but 40%. What tax rate are you referring to —- corporate, gross personal, effective personal? In terms of model healthcare, Australia is not the system you want. Our health system grossly underfunded and ineffective with lots of waste from years of private sector health insurance.

I specifically said average, because it’s important to note that the Swedish personal income tax rate starts at 32% with a tax free threshold of about AUD$3k.

Re: healthcare, you won’t realise how good you have it until you try to go to a Swedish hospital with a torn ACL only for a nurse to diagnose you with a cramp, direct you to take paracetamol and refuse to let you see a doctor. Or when you try to have a blood test done and realise it’s not a 24 hour turn around, but a 24 day turn around if you’re lucky with 1-2 years minimum to see a specialist.

Re: Structural studies of the global networks exposed in the Panama papers

#89

Post by vmception »

smolder wrote: post #76
vmception wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they absolutely will drive to the next county to get cheaper gas or lower property taxes and it is the same concept. Eventually you get to level up to the place of tax deferral that is infinite. You can do it onshore you can do if offshore. It is only hubris for some people to think some governments of their own choosing should have a piece of that. We are talking about the distinctly non corrupt activities.

I think the actual best course of action in general is to deport the rich that cheat on taxes and let them go enjoy being rich in some other country, or in international waters. The idea that we should tolerate big parasites because they'd take their money elsewhere both undervalues everything else about a region and it's people that might keep them there and overestimates the value of being home to greedy wealth. It…

An infinite tax deferral would be too compliant to fit in your tax cheat rubric as deportation would have to a consequence of a criminal tax evasion charge and conviction in a court.

Revenue services are not worried with how much you pay them, they are only concerned with compliance.

Re: Structural studies of the global networks exposed in the Panama papers

#90

Post by nobody9999 »

FandangoRanger wrote: post #82
nobody9999 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Hey where can independent researchers obtain the Panama Papers? I don’t think people can be expected to simply “trust us guys.” Footnote 5 of the paper in the submission provides a link to the data used. For your convenience, that link is: https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/pages/database I look forward to reading your paper when it's complete.

No I mean, the entire dataset. It's being jealously guarded by the "free" press.

Is it? Please explain which data is not included in the ICIJ database[0].

[0] https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/pages/database

Post reply on HN