There should be prisoners dilemma and therefore some country should emerge to fill this "market need"
Here is a good article from The Economist on the situation. I apologise for the low quality of photo of the page.
https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2022/02/26/...
https://web.archive.org/web/20220303055330/https://www.econo...
isn't that a tautology?
Democracies are preventing businesses from operating in russia. What exactly makes democracies so special that it isn't beyond corruption or evil? People have said democracies don't commit genocide, democracies don't invade and steal territory, democracies don't enslave, etc. When the truth is that democracies have committed the greatest genocides, stolen the most land, committed the worst evils. I've yet to get a satisfactory response. Russia is a democracy and the current bogeyman was elected. It's like people are so brainwashed by propaganda that they can't see the truth.
Yeah... re-read history without the biases, and you'll see that that is absolutely false.
> Russia is a democracy and the current bogeyman was elected.
Well, Russia has elections. It also jails those who are trying to run against Putin, and Putin controls the media. So you wind up with the trappings of democracy without the reality. (At least today. I think the original election that he won may have been fair.)
I have re-read history. Who has committed more genocides than the US? What non-democratic country has nuked a city? I don't think I'm the one with the bias here. Just in the post cold war era, almost all the invasions have been carried out by democracies.
> Well, Russia has elections. It also jails those who are trying to run against Putin, and Putin controls the media. So you wind up with the trappings of democracy without the reality.
Right. And who do you think controls the media in other democracies?
> (At least today. I think the original election that he won may have been fair.)
So ultimately, democracy gave us Putin? So democracies are bad.
Instead of just blindly accepting propaganda, maybe you should ask why the propaganda doesn't align with facts and reality. Perhaps, as socrates said, democracies are not good to begin with.
Who has done more genocides than the US? Seriously? Imperial Spain. The Mongol Horde. The Muslim conquest of much of the near east. Imperial Japan. Soviet Russia. Nazi Germany. The Aztec Empire. That's with about two minutes' thought. If I were a historian or bothered to do research, I'm sure I could expand the list.
Your bias is blinding you. Take an actual look at actual history.
Is it? The people who control the media also control the president. Don't think it is any better.
> Who has done more genocides than the US? Seriously?
Yes. Show me one nation/empire that genocided an entire continent full of peoples. Completely wiped out dozens of peoples, cultures and languages. To a point where we don't even know the etymology and meanings of the names of a bunch of states, cities, etc.
> Imperial Spain.
Not even close. There are tens of millions of full blooded native americans all over spanish colonies. There are hardly any in the US.
> The Mongol Horde.
Who did the mongol horde genocide? The russians? Ukrainians?
> The Muslim conquest of much of the near east.
Who did the muslims genocide? Persians? Spanish?
> Imperial Japan.
Who did the imperial japanese genocide?
> Nazi Germany.
Are you claiming nazi germany committed more genocide than the US? They committed 1 genocide. Now compare that to the dozens of peoples we wiped out.
> That's with about two minutes' thought.
It shows. 2 minutes seems about right. There have been dozens of native american nations wiped out. Dozens of native languages wiped out. Dozens of native cultures. Show me another peoples who wiped out a continent full of nations. I'll wait.
> Your bias is blinding you. Take an actual look at actual history.
Says the person who claims imperial japan committed more genocides than the US. Imperial Japan committed 0 genocides. US committed dozens. Are you going to claim imperial japan nuked more cities too?
It seems like you are confused about what the word genocide actually means. It doesn't mean conquering. It doesn't even mean killing a lot of people. It has a specific meaning which makes it one of the most evil acts in human history.
Nobody “controls” the media. Any clown can start a media company and many do, across the full spectrum of opinion. Media also has far less share of communications now anyway. Everyone can publish, as you are here. Go ahead, write what you want. I’m far more likely to be arrested in eg Russia than you are in eg US. Remember https://www.iraqbodycount.org/ ? That’s still up and nobody is in jail. Try post this a few times in Russia and see how that goes: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukra...
Or better yet, https://twitter.com/Schwarzenegger/status/150442684419966976...
Every elite seems to want to cement their power and we have to combat it, always. But democracies in general don’t have “control” in any way recognisable to Russians, Chinese, North Koreans. In South Africa we had the most corrupt shit going on and the media drive politicians nuts. There’s some doublespeak and us/them but that’s just humans for you. In Russia those journalists would be dead or in exile. 30 years ago in SA we had some of that. Incomparable to political influence over media in a democracy, which is typically only over part of it. Not all.
Besides you don’t need to control the media. That’s far too much work. Just have an alternative that your tribe prefers. It seems you can make up any shit and a lot of people will take it as gospel.
He tried. Then those banned reporters went to a judge and he told the White House to let them back in. And they were let back in.
The US press is free.
> ...the rule of the law does not apply...
All of these should be red flags - even if you yourself are shady, you want strong property rights and rule of law, not whatever the local despot feels like doing that day.
How are a bunch of dumb 2nd generation oil pumper warlords going to protect your money longterm?
Rule of law very much exists in the UAE. So much so that they have carved out a distinct common law system (so called DIFC courts) which effectively provide English language common law as a service. This was explicitly done to make investment and commercial activity in the country attractive, and within DIFC boundaries (and IIRC at this point nation-wide) supersedes the authority of Dubai's own courts on a whole range of matters.
Those 'financial free zones' basically function like charter cities so international investors do not have to deal with the domestic Shariah law system.
That type of judicial theater screams of corruption at the highest level.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50205956
DIFC harly has a reputable track record. While on a paper it might sound independent, in reality is it just another extension to Sheik’s tentacles. Any compliance is just lip services.
The checklist fir being an attractive investment target is large country, stable government (check, check), strong property rights and fair treatment of foreigners (don't know, don't know). If Americans start confiscating assets, then the Asians have an opportunity to absorb a lot of money if their governments can be held in check.
Cases take years to be concluded. Sometimes, even decades. The backlog is huge and the relatively very low cost of suing creates a lot of civil suits. In the US, losing a case means paying the costs of the winning side usually - In India the costs are calculated at a ridiculously low rate, that does not deter frivolous cases at all.
Also, the Indian Govt is known for its over zealous taxation of foreign entities - termed tax terrorism. Hardly a tax haven.
I’m guessing the money is made, moved to Dubai then on to the UK, Canada, USA, etc for it to be parked.
There's less appeal if you're an American since the USG taxes you anywhere in the world, but if you're Canadian there's a lot of appeal to live there for a few years as a resident.
The people I've known in this category do something like this:
- Canadian Citizen
- Move to Dubai
- Trade crypto, make eight digit returns, liquidate funds
- Move back to Canada eventually without having had to pay tax on those funds
You can't do this as a US citizen without renouncing citizenship, but you can do this for most countries in the world (at least that's what people doing this have told me, I haven't looked into it that deeply myself).
In practice no way anyone living abroad pays taxes to Eritrea (and probably few would go back given the risks).
This use to be popular with working at sea for 6 months to avoid taxes until it changed. You could be sailing around the world for the next two years any income you make would be taxable even if you renounce your citizenship (unless you take another citizenship or become a resident in a physical location)
So you could do this but for the effort you would be better off trading cryto from Canada avoiding popular exchanges and not reporting
My understanding was you could legally move to the UAE for a time as a Canadian citizen and do what I described.
It seems easy enough to not have day to day operations in Canada during that time. This seems like a way better option than tax evasion and prison imo.
If you got married had a family took another citizenship and lived for many years away your plan could work.
The easiest legally would be to set it up under a company and pay a much lower tax rate.
I left feeling different about the place.
Walking around the residential areas of Chelsea or Knightsbridge I found it to be some of the most boring places in London. Beautiful houses and no one on the streets, pedestrian hostile roads, generally boring perfection.
I think optimising the city for the wealthy when these wealthy are not invested in the community kills the spirit of the city. London doesn't have particularly beautiful nature or weather, so if you make it about perfect streets and expensive buildings you can build something much better somewhere else. What London actually offers that is extremely valuable is a great culture and institutions and all these rich people who occupy a place in London without being in London are undermining it.
London has much more to offer than hiding the elites money, just as the Switzerland. These are advanced communities that has a lot of more going on for them beside accommodating the rich people of the world. The accumulated wealth in these places is not like the wealth in Silicon Valley, it is stale.
IMHO the dilution of the artificial wealth saturation will result in talented people having their impact amplified.
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/real-estate/russian-money-f...
1. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-02/russian-o...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Protasevich
(Russia's puppet BTW)
And speaking of forcing a plane going between two countries to land try to make a political arrest, who did it first?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achille_Lauro_hijacking#Interc...
What made you think I suggested anything of the sort? I'm sorry but your whole comment is a non sequitur.
To restate your idea: You want to invade a country at peace, kill its citizens and overthrow its government just to inconvenience some rich thugs.
an event or a group of events occurring as part of a sequence; an incident or period considered in isolation.
Is there something in the above definition that preculudes it from being used to refer to a genocide? And a more pertinent question: Was there a point to you comment apart from the feigned indignation?
I agree.
i might be able to afford a house there
The sooner we get to a point where tyranny overtly seeks tyranny, for all to see, the better.
https://www.nationalobserver.com/2022/03/18/news/canada-prim...
Excellent starting point, I wonder what other rights should we dispense with.
Johnson and his government are doing with the Ukraine/Russia issue what they have done on virtually every other topic: talk loudly and carry a very small stick. They have made some grand statements about punishing these oligarchs, while moving at a glacial pace, so as to allow these oligarchs to liquidate as much as possible and flee.
I think, once the war in Ukraine is over (please God that's soon), the next Tory government (it's always the Tories!) will simply revert to type, take money from the Russian oligarchs who still want access for their kids to schools such as Eton, Harrow, etc. and allow the laundering to continue.
As long as the Murdoch press continues to misinform the British public on these issues, Johnson and his Tory ilk will have enough air cover to continue allowing these oligarchs to finance their party (political), their parties (social), and further corrupt the entire political system (see "Lord Lebedev").
How is it bad? If the Russian elite would be at least partly be indoctrinated in the western values it could only do good.
It was the case in the Soviet Union too that even though the West was the enemy, the status symbols were still all Western. In a weird way the elites aspired and lusted over the produce of Western consumerism.
Nobody outside is going to want to secure their wealth there. If kleptocratic Russians wanted that sort of arrangement, they could just keep it in Russia.