: Cayman Islands collapse: why it matters http://bit.ly/1dgPUw

RT @libcon : Cayman Islands collapse: why it matters http://bit.ly/1dgPUw

RT @libcon : Cayman Islands collapse: why it matters http://bit.ly/1dgPUw – damn fine article by Paul Sagar.

I’m glad the bail out was refused, let these free-market idiots pay the price for pushing the very limits of the idea.

Milton Freidman has much to answer for.

RT @tweetmeme Liberal Conspiracy » Cayman Islands collapse: why it matters http://bit.ly/LUKtS

Paul Sagar: “The Cayman Islands are insolvent. Broke. Unable to make ends meet. Government staff are going unpaid”

Thatcheritelibertarians: “You say that like it’s a bad thing!”

RT @Libcon Cayman Islands collapse: why it matters http://bit.ly/1dgPUw

[I know Milton was a "libertarian to the point of nuttiness" and a constant advocate of lower taxes but it just irks me to see him made into a cartoon villain ... so...] DHG, please read this article about Milton Friedman’s views on taxation. Note his support for “progressive taxation on the consumption of the wealthy” and redistribution via a “negative income tax” paid to the poor. Now tell me honestly, how does that fit with your picture of MF? As per the Caymans, I’m not sure he would have been a fan of secrecy and criminality, even if he might have approved of countries engaging in “tax competition”.

Spain’s worst left back, please see Chile and Argentina for reference.

DHG,

yes, I imagined that simply saying something like “oh, that’s interesting. I did not know that.” might be beyond you.

Oh so you don’t like evidence to the contrary then?

Poor you.

evidence to the contrary of what?

You provide one side of the Milton Friedman evil, I provide the other.

DHG, I am perfectly well aware of MF’s role in Chile, I merely presented you with something about him that I thought might be new to you.

[incidentally, did you know that as well as offering economic advice to the repulsive Pinochet regime, he did the same for the repulsive communist Chinese and Yugoslavian regimes? Some references for here and here and here ]

RT @libcon Liberal Conspiracy » Cayman Islands collapse: why it matters http://bit.ly/LUKtS

Thanks for that. I can’t stand the man or his ideas.

Interesting (if brief) @libcon article on Caymans collapse. http://is.gd/2Sbzg (via @PennyRed)

@9

Well, there you are then. Milton Friedman had no qualms with doing work with nasty, totalitarian, repressive, torturing regimes around the world. Basically, a bastard.

I can’t stand the man or his ideas.

What, all of his ideas? Did he campaign for nothing that you would support? That’s quite a sweeping statement about a recognised intellectual. Even JKG agreed with him sometimes.

I didn’t realise this was about me sli but if you must know, you may recognise him as an intellectual but I don’t…

http://danielhg.blogspot.com/2009/09/milton-friedman-and-chicago-school-of.html

@11

The difference is that when they took some of his advice, they became moderately less totalitarian and torturous. In the case of China, quite dramatically so. Considering that no state regime is exactly blameless and without an awful lot of blood on their hands, it seems you either do nothing or deal with a few unsavoury types in trying to make the world better.

I don’t believe the Cayman Islands should be bailed out incidentally. Nothing wrong with a bit of creative destruction. It is what markets do now and then.

It’s not about you, my post relates to what you wrote.

Neither is it important whether or not I think he was a learned man, he was recognised throughout the world as such – even by people who disagreed with him.

Nick:

I think the point is that they were still not a beacon of democracy, something that much of Milton’s clients seem to lean towards. And creative destruction makes this sound that their are no victims and it’s a wonderful thing. It is not, at all. The ideas that created the problem need to be addressed not dismiss it all as somehow creative.

Sli:

Well, I’ve made my position on the bastard quite clear and I think you’re confusing learned with a complete lack of self-doubt.

“creative destruction”

Gotta love that euphemism.

Indeed Neil…

cf. “if you want to make an omelet, you must be willing to break a few eggs”

Neil, I would agree that sometimes difficult choices have to be made. Problem is, often the omelet for “B” uses “A”s eggs.

Milo Minderbinder would be proud!

It’s just another example of the business bullshit “cost benefit analysis”; rarely do the people paying the cost gain the benefit.

Err, “creative destruction” comes from Mises, not Friedman.

As to not liking anything Milton supported or proposed.

Lessee: he was against the draft (conscription to us UKites) and one of the major figures in it abolition. He argued for the decriminalisation of drugs. He was one of the inventors of with holding taxes from pay cheques.

Seriously, nothing you can agree with?

As to Cayman: the fiscal troubles are being caused by the fact that they went off an invested in hte infrastructure of the islands. Guess that puts an end to the argument that government spending always pays for itself then (you can look round Murphy’s blog to find the link).

Finally, the Cayman newspaper has proposed a Tobin tax to fill the budget gap. Huge outcry from Murphy and the like, but, but, that’s regressive!

They still advocate a Tobin tax here though…

Tim, are you paid to run around the Internets blowing smoke up Uncle Milty’s cadaverous ringpiece, or what?

Neil, why don’t you just deal with the points he makes?

sli, why don’t you?

Err, “creative destruction” comes from Mises, not Friedman.

Actually it comes from Schumpeter. /nitpicking

Well for one thing I didn’t react to his post with abuse and secondly he makes some valid points, MF was indeed very liberal on many issues.

Ah, another self-appointed King of the Comment Boxes.

Sorry, I thought this was a discussion forum, you know, someone says something, someone else responds etc.

I’m beginning to think that here, one “wins” the game by name-calling and abusing anyone who makes a point you disagree with (though making sure you don’t explain why you disagree)

Grow up

Yes. Whatever. You. Say. Your. Majesty.

He argued for the decriminalisation of drugs

I guess that makes everything allright then.

Anyway! The post is about the Cayman Islands and tax evasion, not bloody Milton Friedman and the rubbish he spouted.

Dan: You are of course correct. Mea Culpa.

“Anyway! The post is about the Cayman Islands and tax evasion”

Excellent, I look forward to comments on the comment I made about Cayman and taxes then….

As to Cayman: the fiscal troubles are being caused by the fact that they went off an invested in hte infrastructure of the islands.

Or it could just possibly be that they went too far towards the “low tax” end of the Laffer curve.

Liberal Conspiracy » Cayman Islands collapse: why it matters http://bit.ly/3NrP9g

“Or it could just possibly be that they went too far towards the “low tax” end of the Laffer curve.”

No, the reports are quite specific. They geared up to build stuff and then revenues fell below projections.

And raising more revenue through higher taxes wouldn’t have helped there?

I think you’ve a little of a straw man there Tim, I think you know it too.

Of course in an economy like the Cayman Islands, which is dominated by banking and tourism there isn’t much infrastructure building necessary. The spillovers generated aren’t the same in a small unbalanced economies like the Cayman islands as would be here.

Much like Singapore’s healthcare system is helped by it’s small geographic spread, so Cayman’s undiversified economy hinders any infrastructure by government. Without looking into this further I don’t know if this infrastructure was even meant to pay for itself or if general taxation was and they’ve just been caught out.

Of course the initial government investment in infrastructure to give the islands its transport and telecommunications systems did pay for themselves eventually, even if the islands are bust now.

“And raising more revenue through higher taxes wouldn’t have helped there?”

Sure, my snark was directed only at those who think (deludedly) that government spending *always* pays for itself.

Tim,

“As to Cayman: the fiscal troubles are being caused by the fact that they went off an invested in hte infrastructure of the islands. Guess that puts an end to the argument that government spending always pays for itself then (you can look round Murphy’s blog to find the link).”

Er, except Richard has always coupled the promotion of government spending with sustainable tax revenues and borrowing from sustainable sources, rather than relying solely upon company registration fees and regressive taxes levied on the poorest.

And to say that UK economy is not the same as Cayman’s is something of a massive understatement.

Don’t you ever tire of reciting snide disingenuous arguments only presenting half of the story?

“Sure, my snark was directed only at those who think (deludedly) that government spending *always* pays for itself.”

So why bring Richard into it?

Richard has never held that deluded position.

Stop putting up straw men to burn.

Sir,

Our islands are not “bust”, sorry to p*** on your rhubarb.

In an act of staggering hypocrisy the UK government refused a loan, and then in a rather insulting and dismissive gesture, the FOC denied permission for Cayman to borrow from private sources to help them overcome a budget deficit.

Of course, that’s fine for the UK and Labour who just print more money in an attempt to cover up the fact that your own island is far more bankrupt than the Cayman islands – and in more ways than one.

I’m tired of repeating myself on the matter, but the UK is hardly in a position to lecture anyone and until its deluded citizens wake up and realize that the sun set on the glory days long before most of its population were born, they will persist with an arrogant and imperialistic attitude that is laughable in 2009.

The lack of direct taxation is something you are no doubt very envious of, living and dying as you all do under one of the worst personal tax burdens on the planet. Cayman has managed for 200 years without direct taxation on its populace and we will continue to do so.

It makes me laugh that all the high tax nations, like yours, whose unregulated banking practices are largely to blame for much of the trouble you are now facing, start pointing fingers at everyone else and pompously asserting that offshore tax free jurisdictions are to blame for all your woes. It’s misdirection and lies to pacify the sheep. But, hey, that’s the culture in the UK in the 21st Century – a culture of blame and whining.

Socialism is a wonderful thing isn’t it? Rather than spitefully and gleefully maligning our islands, why don’t you grow up, take a very close look at your own shores,fix your badly broken and divided society and realize that the arrogance
and certainty you seem to believe is yours by right as a Briton is what has led to the country’s unenviable and derided reputation around the world.

I know you probably can’t afford to vacation here because you are being fleeced by a system that works against it’s indigenous population, but if you ever came here, I think you would see why our society has a far brighter future than yours can ever hope for.

A collapse in the Cayman Islands is not a good thing. The Caymans and Switzerland are two very good reasons why our politicians are so scared of raising corporation tax and top-earner income taxes.

If there were no low-tax jurisdictions in the world, we’d have massively high taxes in all countries (politicians just love to raise taxes) leading to mass unemployment (how else do you think companies will fund their tax bills if not by reducing the workforce).

The only thing that prevents our politicians stifling economic growth through high taxes are the low-tax jurisdictions. We need the tax competition – unless we want to see a return of communism I guess.

Maurice,

So why the begging letter?

Mark M,

Meanwhile in the real world, everybody else realises that higher corporation taxes do not equal communism. Hence why the USA has some of the highest corporation taxes in the world, yet is suprisingly not a bastion of state socialism…

Paul,

Let’s be clear here. The “begging letter” as you insist on calling it, is the first time in the islands’ history that they have approached the UK for financial assistance.

Why did Cayman ask? Because as a British dependent territory, one would expect the first port of call for some small level of assistance would be the islands’ supposed benefactors and protectors. Relying on such a failed and miserable government was obviously a rather vain hope.

It is doubtless far greater wisdom and statesmanship to thumb one’s nose and gloat with that smug and obnoxious air so typical of a section of the population over there.

Cayman is not a tax secrecy jurisdiction, we are not Switzerland or Liechtenstein. Cayman is a loyal and supposedly valued part of what is left of the British empire and hoped, misguidedly of course, thought that Britain would assist them.

It’s all rather irrelevant because events have since overtaken this matter. The islands will manage without the UK’s assistance as we always have done in the past.

“The only thing that prevents our politicians stifling economic growth through high taxes are the low-tax jurisdictions. We need the tax competition – unless we want to see a return of communism I guess.”

I see the trolls get more idiotic by the day.

Never a shortage of village idiots in troll land who want to defend the rich for avoiding paying any tax.

I wish all these tax avoiders would piss off and take their families with them and live in the cayman islands. This idea that they live here in the UK and the US but pretend to live in these tax havens is pure bullshit. If they want to pay no tax then fuck off. Oh, and give up your vote here as well. I am sure the caymans will be delighted to have all these freeloaders come out and invest in their island.
.

sally,

If they really are insolvent and unable to pay civil servants, whom I’d assume include teachers and perhaps doctors, maybe a bridging loan is not altogether unreasonable?

It is all very well to argue against fat cats, as you do, it is not so good to argue against the welfare of ordinary people.

By all means expropriate every penny Maurice might have there, or frankly anywhere else on the planet, but do not fuck up kids education or health on your way…..

@Sally

Ma’am,

Like most so called socialists you seem blinded by bitterness and resentment and equate the word “wealthy”, with evil, corruption, and countless other negative connotations and find it impossible to believe anyone who is financially better off than you are can be anything but all those adjectives too.

It is easier to hate and spew invective than to take responsibility for your own fortunes is it not?

For the record, I am very far from wealthy, but I am an English expat married to a Caymanian. Like most decent ordinary folk we work hard and try to make a valuable contribution to our society. There is wealth on our islands and some of that wealth inevitably filters down through the economy here and as a result benefits those of more moderate means. Has it occurred to you that people choose to live here for reasons other than those demonstrated by your own blinkered views?

We pay no direct taxes, but believe me, the cost of living is high here and most essential things such as food and utilities cost more than in your country. For ordinary people life is as much a struggle as in other developed countries. You won’t find a rental apartment for much less than CI$1000 per month for example, so don’t believe that everyone is living high on the hog here by any means. But you know what, we love our country, we look after each other and live in harmony despite being a racially and demographically diverse population. We respect ourselves and each other and the sun shines on us year round.

Have you ever been here? I am assuming not, so what gives you the right to attack our country in such a manner? I notice that most bloggers and journalists in the UK have posted maps to accompany their writings, because, let’s face it, the vast majority have no idea where Cayman is, let alone anything about its society, history or anything else.

Your uninformed opinions and position on the matter of Cayman clashes somewhat with what I am assuming you consider your political views. If, as so many other individuals who lean towards the left seem to be saying on the internet, that you relish the day when Cayman collapses, who do you think will suffer the most? Will it be the small percentage of very wealthy individuals who, quite legally, reside here either temporarily or permanently, or do you think those of more modest means will bear the brunt? Still, as long as you can gloat over a victory against the “wealthy” that makes it alright eh?

Expressing yourself this way makes you appear bigoted, unpleasant, unfair and poorly informed. Resorting to Anglo Saxon expletives demeans you and your views too, I’m sorry to say.

I have nothing against you personally, I just disagree with you. I’m sorry life has treated you the way it has, or the way you seem to feel it has. As I keep saying, perhaps you should look for constructive ways to improve things in your homeland for yourself and your countrymen. Current political methods hardly seem to be working for you.

Angry all the time is no way to spend your life, but misery loves company as they say. I’m going to sit in my hammock in my back yard now and drink a nice cold Corona.

@Douglas,

Sir, thank you for your reasoned thoughts – I trust my reply to Sally clears up the issue of my having money here

My wife is an artist and we run a fine art printing business for other artists and retailers on the islands. We live in a rented apartment, we drive a 15 year old car and have a young son. We can’t afford medical insurance and have no savings.

I’m not complaining, just making my position clear. My initial responses were purely in defence of my home and those who seem to feel it is OK to malign it with no thought and who feel they should be free to do so with impunity. That is just plain wrong sir.

Maurice,

Yes, and I played ‘rich man, poor man’ a bit too much…

Ho, hum.

I expect had you said what you had to say at 49 earlier, then this debate might have been a bit more open than it seems to be.

AFAIK the UK is still responsible for it’s colonies, and that ought to mean setting out reasonable democratic / social and financial standards. Where these break international standards then they ought to be subject to audit.

Doesn’t mean you wouldn’t hold an advantage, just, perhaps not so much of one.

Last point, honest, if you have no health care then you are living in a libertarian world that will flatten you and, more importantly, your kid, if anything serious goes wrong with you. Absent charity.

It is perhaps people like you, living a dream maybe, that ought to wake up to boring shit?

Best wishes.

“There is wealth on our islands and some of that wealth inevitably filters down through the economy here and as a result benefits those of more moderate means.”

How nice that some filters down. Given that you say you’re not wealthy, wouldn’t it be better if more came down through, I dunno, redistributive taxation?

“We pay no direct taxes, but believe me, the cost of living is high here and most essential things such as food and utilities cost more than in your country.”

Well yes, that’s what happens when rich tax-exiles crowd in, driving up the cost of living, which is further componded by the government’s reliance upon indirect taxation which puts the cost of living up, regressively affecting the worse off. Like – as you are keen to point out – yourself.

“For ordinary people life is as much a struggle as in other developed countries. ”

And yet you don’t think a bit of redistribution via fair taxation may be in order?

“But you know what, we love our country, we look after each other and live in harmony despite being a racially and demographically diverse population. We respect ourselves and each other and the sun shines on us year round.”

Oh well that’s ok then. No matter that the rich ex pats and rich on-paper ex pats are exploiting your jurisdiction to deny tax revenues due in their native countries as well as denying them to you. But how much longer can this great Caymanian solidarity last, do you reckon? Generally, people react badly to economic disaster, especially when the best-off are contributing the least.

“Have you ever been here? I am assuming not,”

As a man also of modest means, I have not been able to afford the flights out to visit. I have, however, spent over a hundred hours in the UK national archives, reading up on how your little tropical paradise came into existence. It’s very interesting.

“so what gives you the right to attack our country in such a manner? ”

1. Your country only exercise autonomy by the whim of our Parliament
2. Your country is a secrecy jurisdiction which facilitates tax evasion and avoidance from our country
3. Your country helps to destabilise the global financial system through its extensive financial secrecy
4. Your country contributes to global corruption, crime and poverty.

Need I go on?

“I notice that most bloggers and journalists in the UK have posted maps to accompany their writings, because, let’s face it, the vast majority have no idea where Cayman is, let alone anything about its society, history or anything else.”

Perhaps that’s true of others. It ain’t true of me.

“If, as so many other individuals who lean towards the left seem to be saying on the internet, that you relish the day when Cayman collapses, who do you think will suffer the most? Will it be the small percentage of very wealthy individuals who, quite legally, reside here either temporarily or permanently, or do you think those of more modest means will bear the brunt?”

Hoho, playing the “what about the poor!?” card, are we?

Well Cayman’s resposne so far has been 1. To claim it’s all a UK conspiracy theory, 2. to propose putting up taxes on the poorest: more indirect consumption taxes, and new taxes for the poor migrant workers sending wealth home to Jamaica. Nice.

If Cayman collapses, it will have to find something economically viable to do. Tourism, maybe. But let’s not be under the illusion that the Cayman at present offers fantastic standards of living to its non-financial elites. It doesn’t. Those non-elites are seen as a service class to service the elites. The government of Cayman and the financial institutions don’t give a fuck about them…or else they’d have proper tax regimes that don’t regressively penalise the poor, whilst letting the rich get away with paying pittance.

But if the only way that Cayman can survive is by free-riding on the rest of the world, ensuring tax revenues are denied to democratically elected regimes elsewhere, and facilitating mass capital flight from the developing world, it does *not* follow that Cayman has a continued right to exist because of vague gestures about its domestic poor. What about the domestic poor of the rest of the world suffering because of Cayman’s activities? Eh? I suppose they don’t count because the status quo has been set.

And furthermore, do you think it’s a problem that this argument – oh, think of the poor in Cayman should the financial sector collapse! – is exactly the same argument slave traders used against abolitionists in the UK in the days of empire? They claimed abolition would devastate the port towns like Liverpool and leave the poor destitute, who otherwise survived because of the economy of the slave trade. Nice historical company you are keeping.

“Expressing yourself this way makes you appear bigoted, unpleasant, unfair and poorly informed. ”

Mirror, mirror on the wall…

But enough of this stupid game. I’m calling you out for what I’m 90% sure you are: Astroturf.

Fuck Cayman and it’s PR offensive. The UK is calling time on your nasty little 40 year experiment, and not a moment too soon.

“Cayman is not a tax secrecy jurisdiction, we are not Switzerland or Liechtenstein. ”

Hilarious.

You operate some of the most extensive banking and trust secrecy laws on the planet. It is illegal to even ask for some kinds of financial information in Cayman. I have copies of official UK government documents going back to the 1960s talking about the “Cayman Tax Haven Problem”.

Yet you tell us that you are not a tax secrecy jurisdiction? For the record, it’s true that you are not Switzerland or Liechtenstein. The former is still a worse global offender than you – just about. But the latter is an absolut minow compared to Cayman, which is the 5th largest banking centre in the world, for crying out loud!

But this just all confirms my suspicions: Astroturf.

“The islands will manage without the UK’s assistance as we always have done in the past.”

How? You going to do what Barclays did and go to the Sheiks? Nobody else will lend you the money.

And if you do THAT, then I think the UK will definitely revoke your autonomy because our Parliament does not want ultimate responsibility for that kind of debt baggage.

You say that this is the first time you’ve ever asked the UK for money. So what? You’re now £60million in the red – a huge sum for a territory of only 50,000 people, i.e. what would pass for a small town in the UK. That you’ve never needed to beg before doesn’t matter. You need to beg now. Because your economic model – like Icelands – is unsustainable.

Astroturf.

@Douglas,

Sir, maybe you are right but one can type only so fast

Colonies is perhaps a word to be avoided, this is where those in Britain seem somewhat confused over the relationship between our countries. Cayman is a self governing democratic country, but has a Governor appointed by the Queen. (it’s all available online should people care to research it) Cayman elected to retain a relationship with Britain when Jamaica became independent, which is why it saddens me to feel that despite the loyalty of these small islands so many British commentators seem so willing to disparage and insult them.

I have pointed out in other forums that Cayman has done much over the years to enter into tax treaties and transparency laws with other nations and despite being “grey listed” by the OECD until recently, complied with all that was asked of them to satisfy removal from that list to the “white list”. It is unfair to compare Cayman with countries like Switzerland because it is my understanding that the regimes are vastly different in relation to banking secrecy and the like. I concede I am certainly no expert, but then, neither are many of people who sit behind their keyboards and spout nonsense because they heard “The Caymans” mentioned in a Hollywood movie and therefore accept it must be true that we shelter terrorists, launder drug money etc and are therefore generally despicable

I am sure, if the UK thought the islands were that out of control they would have stepped in before now but they didn’t and by your reasoning that suggests that either there was no reason to, or they had good reasons for not wanting to does it not? Therefore, some of the criticism and attitudes coming from the UK are blatantly hypocritical. Much of it has to do with satisfying the POTUS who is desperately seeking to appear to be a man of action and who singled out offshore financial centers long before his election. I guess those who wander the corridors of power in Westminster are happy to write Cayman off as collateral damage to protect relationships across the Pond.

As for living in a libertarian society, I concede you have a valid point and hear what you say about boring s**t Without going into my personal life too deeply and for far too long, let’s just say that the current situation for me is simply one of “life happened” and the rebuilding phase is still underway. My wife and child would be well taken care of should anything happen to me and we live in a society where health care for children is free so my son’s welfare is secure enough. Thanks for your concern though, and it’s nice to debate with someone who possesses some reason.

Regard to you and yours from Cayman.

Maurice

“Cayman elected to retain a relationship with Britain when Jamaica became independent, which is why it saddens me to feel that despite the loyalty of these small islands so many British commentators seem so willing to disparage and insult them.”

And by doing so, was able to profit immensley from the paranoia of US and UK investors who were terrified of a “black takeover” in the Caribbean, and saw Cayman as a nice safe tax-haven bet. It was naff-all to do with loyalty to the Queen. And you don’t just have a ceremonial relationship…that’s why you begged us for money, remember?

“I have pointed out in other forums that Cayman has done much over the years to enter into tax treaties and transparency laws with other nations and despite being “grey listed” by the OECD until recently, complied with all that was asked of them to satisfy removal from that list to the “white list”.”

1. OECD conditions on tax information exchange are a much-documented joke

2. As noted above, Cayman’s financial secrecy laws are fantastically wide-ranging

3. Can you please prove that you don’t harbour terrorist, money launderers, tax evaders etc? Er, no you can’t, because that would mean having to end your banking and trust secrecy….

“I am sure, if the UK thought the islands were that out of control they would have stepped in before now but they didn’t and by your reasoning that suggests that either there was no reason to, or they had good reasons for not wanting to does it not? Therefore, some of the criticism and attitudes coming from the UK are blatantly hypocritical.”

Hypocrisy indeed. But then, the organisation I work for ranks the City of London as a major secrecy jurisdiction as well. Yet I do feel it apt to point out to you that two wrongs do not make a right…

“Much of it has to do with satisfying the POTUS who is desperately seeking to appear to be a man of action and who singled out offshore financial centers long before his election. I guess those who wander the corridors of power in Westminster are happy to write Cayman off as collateral damage to protect relationships across the Pond.”

But if “POTUS” (sorry, are we in the Westwing?) is saying the right things, what’s wrong with backing him? Eh? “Either the biggest building in the world, or the biggest tax scam…and I think the American people know what it is”, said the great man of Cayman’s lovely Ugland House which is home to 18,000 companies through the magic of brass plates…

“My wife and child would be well taken care of should anything happen to me and we live in a society where health care for children is free so my son’s welfare is secure enough.”

Er, but you said

“We can’t afford medical insurance and have no savings.”

Hmm….

ASTRO ASTRO ASTROTURF!

@Paul,

Sir, firstly, some of the comments you responded to were not directly in response to things you had said, so understand that I was not questioning your own knowledge or experience. I also clearly stated that I was neither a financial or tax expert myself.

I do object to the characterization of a nation/people that is ill informed and uncharitable from those who know nothing about those whom they attack. That has less to do with politics than it does with being a human being.

So, moving along and addressing your responses:

“And yet you don’t think a bit of redistribution via fair taxation may be in order?”

I did not say this. Taxation and fairness seem to be a matter of opinion based on one’s own position. I do not believe that direct taxation of the citizens would be of benefit other than to those who you seem to despise so much – the wealthy. A knee jerk reaction would simply make them relocate their financial affairs elsewhere would it not? This would result in less of their wealth filtering down, not more.

“Oh well that’s ok then. No matter that the rich ex pats and rich on-paper ex pats are exploiting your jurisdiction to deny tax revenues due in their native countries as well as denying them to you. But how much longer can this great Caymanian solidarity last, do you reckon? Generally, people react badly to economic disaster, especially when the best-off are contributing the least”.

You believe this to be the case with expats in Cayman, and to what degree you are right or wrong neither one of us can prove or disprove. Are they denying us of tax when it is not demanded of them? They may well be denying UK/US of taxes but if the regimes in those countries were not so punitive they would not feel the need to move away from those shores. If you were wealthy, can you say that you would not consider doing the same? I’m just asking, I’m not trying to justify it or be insulting.

I think you once again underestimate the people of Cayman. Sure, we expect some tough times ahead and we will have to deal with them. I honestly believe that as a society we are better equipped to do so as evidenced by the post Hurricane Ivan situation and recovery.

“1. Your country only exercise autonomy by the whim of our Parliament
2. Your country is a secrecy jurisdiction which facilitates tax evasion and avoidance from our country
3. Your country helps to destabilise the global financial system through its extensive financial secrecy
4. Your country contributes to global corruption, crime and poverty.”

I’m sorry to hear you can’t afford the flights, I’m sure you would love our islands. I can’t afford to fly to the UK either right now, much as I would sometimes love to do to visit family etc

1) Sorry, but that is unbelievably arrogant and illustrates perfectly the misguided belief held by many that Britain is still the ruler of the seas and two thirds of the world map are pink. Those days are gone forever sir. If it is true you are hung by your own petard as it indicates the culpability and collusion of your own leaders.
2) Your country operates punitive taxation laws to counteract reckless disregard for the public purse and the money of hard working taxpayers. If those laws have holes in them than can be circumvented by tax experts and lawyers what do you expect?
3) The global financial system is in a mess due to unregulated banking practices onshore in wealthy nations like the US/UK is it not? None of our banks have gone under taking millions of ordinary people’s money with them. If your claim is true, which I concede it may be, don’t you at least concede that your own fair isle has just as great a hand in it all as ours?
4) Pot, Kettle, Black. Simple as that, which is why a once proud nation is reviled around the globe by so many. Far more I would guess than those who have issues with Cayman.

“Hoho, playing the “what about the poor!?” card, are we?”

I wasn’t playing a card of any kind, I was stating an obvious fact. Your response does not indicate whether you agree or not but presumably you would? Your hatred for the rich is so evident and vehemently expressed I assume you could see that if a lot of the wealth left here, the consequences would affect not just “the poor” but certainly every average citizen in some way shape or form. What is the sense in precipitating that by imposing taxes when our tax free status is such a large part of our economy?

“Well Cayman’s resposne so far has been 1. To claim it’s all a UK conspiracy theory, 2. to propose putting up taxes on the poorest: more indirect consumption taxes, and new taxes for the poor migrant workers sending wealth home to Jamaica. Nice”.

I haven’t read the conspiracy theories but the UK’s response certainly indicates rather clearly that they wish to wash their hands of the issue and have sent a clear message that they do not wish to offer any kind of support or assistance financial or otherwise.

To your second point, this was an option voiced by some, and rejected already for the exact reasons you state. It was not considered even handed and common sense prevailed.

“If Cayman collapses, it will have to find something economically viable to do. Tourism, maybe. But let’s not be under the illusion that the Cayman at present offers fantastic standards of living to its non-financial elites. It doesn’t. Those non-elites are seen as a service class to service the elites. The government of Cayman and the financial institutions don’t give a fuck about them…or else they’d have proper tax regimes that don’t regressively penalise the poor, whilst letting the rich get away with paying pittance”.

Paul, come on, you think Cayman has no tourist industry? True the recession is causing shrinkage but tourism is obviously a big part of our economy, all year round.

What do you know about our standard of living? You admit you have never been here. Are you one of those who think we all live in little mud huts and should behave like the ignorant little uneducated natives that we are? Know our place? Understand that we are survive only through the good grace of our lords and masters across the Atlantic in the motherland. You sound dangerously like a colonial imperialist….but surely not Maybe you should get together with the clown at the Guardian who claimed that most native Caymanians live in breeze block homes, surrounded by scrub land and goats and chickens.

Don’t do yourself the disservice of believing that pomposity constitutes a sound moral position. For your information, the levels of poverty you seem to imagine exist here are exaggerated and although like most societies we have all levels of money or lack thereof, we don’t have a homelessness problem on the disgusting scale that you do in the UK. Even the less well off can afford to keep a roof over their head and feed themselves, largely because they don’t have a greedy treasury taking everything but the clothes on their backs such as the one you enjoy in your Utopian society.

“But if the only way that Cayman can survive is by free-riding on the rest of the world, ensuring tax revenues are denied to democratically elected regimes elsewhere, and facilitating mass capital flight from the developing world, it does *not* follow that Cayman has a continued right to exist because of vague gestures about its domestic poor. What about the domestic poor of the rest of the world suffering because of Cayman’s activities? Eh? I suppose they don’t count because the status quo has been set.”

If you could prove any sort of definitive connection to the sweeping claims you make about the world’s poor and Cayman’s hand in making their lot even worse I’d be pleased to debate it with you. Maybe you should look more closely at the whole of the western world for that though, including the high hand the UK has held in those stakes for hundreds of years. You destroy what I imagine you saw as your cleverly crafted sarcasm about me “playing the poor card” but we’ll give you a moment to pull your foot out of your mouth before we continue….dust yourself off old boy, stiff upper lip and all that!

“And furthermore, do you think it’s a problem that this argument – oh, think of the poor in Cayman should the financial sector collapse! – is exactly the same argument slave traders used against abolitionists in the UK in the days of empire? They claimed abolition would devastate the port towns like Liverpool and leave the poor destitute, who otherwise survived because of the economy of the slave trade. Nice historical company you are keeping”.

What a leap of faith to reach that analogy. As I said, the days of empire are long gone, it is you who persist in acting as if they still exist. What on earth do abolitionists and slaves have to do with our discussion? You are clutching at straws in an attempt to discredit a comment that I made that stated a simple fact and which you embellished in your typically phony left wing, righteous indignation. Trying to relocate an argument to a completely different period of history so that you can make ludicrous comparisons and put words in other people’s mouths is desperate and unworthy of you sir. Don’t be a troll.

““Expressing yourself this way makes you appear bigoted, unpleasant, unfair and poorly informed. ””

“Mirror, mirror on the wall…”

This was not directed at you, as well you know, more specifically at another commentator. If this is an attempt to defend their attitude then you are apparently no better. On what basis am I being bigoted, unpleasant, unfair or poorly informed? Maybe on the last count I am as guilty as others, I’m not young enough to know everything, but I’m not the one attacking people based on the size of their bank account or my own bitter feelings that life has dealt me a less than fair hand. Whining is like riding an exercise bike; it may give you something to do but it doesn’t get you anywhere.

“But enough of this stupid game. I’m calling you out for what I’m 90% sure you are: Astroturf.

“Fuck Cayman and it’s PR offensive. The UK is calling time on your nasty little 40 year experiment, and not a moment too soon”.

Firstly, I assume you are accusing me of being phony with your “astroturf” witticism. Very droll, sir, I shall just take a moment to sew up my sides…..

Secondly: Finally, there we have it, the resort of the desperate when losing any kind of argument, good old, ever reliable cuss words, the shelter of every good anger and hate filled plastic socialist. You disappoint me, I thought you were educated and open to debate but you reveal yourself to be far less than that. It was fun though.

As I said before, misery loves company, I’ll leave you to shout like an imbecile at the six o’clock news, as no doubt you do on a regular basis while indignantly bemoaning the unfairness of life and watching your taxes disappear into a black hole of fraud and corruption that is modern Britain while feeling as helpless, as you doubtless are, to do anything about it.

Oh, for the record, slavery is alive and well in your country in all its ugly shapes and forms, look it up.

Liberal Conspiracy » Cayman Islands collapse: why it matters: For the record, I am very far from wealthy, but I .. http://bit.ly/3ksFoI

@Paul,

Ok, we’ll do these ones and agree to differ I reckon.

“And by doing so, was able to profit immensley from the paranoia of US and UK investors who were terrified of a “black takeover” in the Caribbean, and saw Cayman as a nice safe tax-haven bet. It was naff-all to do with loyalty to the Queen. And you don’t just have a ceremonial relationship…that’s why you begged us for money, remember?”

I’m sorry, but the people of Cayman (I was referring to them if you recall) were immensely loyal to the Crown and the older generations here have always been that way. They loved your nation. Talking the way you do about people of whom you have zero first hand knowledge exemplifies your ignorance and suggests than the thin veneer you try to present to us conceals a rather cynical ingrate beneath.

Did I say “Ceremonial Relationship’? There you go again putting words in other people’s mouths to prime your spurious arguments. Why do you insist on using the words “begged” and “begging”? One government went to another and asked for assistance. They were refused. This makes you happy, although I have no idea why your twisted attitude makes you feel so smug.

“1. OECD conditions on tax information exchange are a much-documented joke”

“2. As noted above, Cayman’s financial secrecy laws are fantastically wide-ranging”

“3. Can you please prove that you don’t harbour terrorist, money launderers, tax evaders etc? Er, no you can’t, because that would mean having to end your banking and trust secrecy….”

1) So you seem to believe but I honestly don’t know. I am not an expert in these matters as I have freely admitted. I am only quoting, as you do, from what I read and hear from others presumably more knowledgeable than myself. Maybe we are both guilty of presuming too much.

2) You ask me for proof in your third point, do you have proof of this to offer me or nothing more than hearsay or your own belief that it is so?

3) No, I cannot prove it as you have already anticipated no doubt. But by the same token, if secrecy is so all encompassing, how could you possibly know the reverse is true?

“Hypocrisy indeed. But then, the organisation I work for ranks the City of London as a major secrecy jurisdiction as well. Yet I do feel it apt to point out to you that two wrongs do not make a right…”

So we agree on the hypocrisy of governments and many corporations, and I also agree that two wrongs do not make a right. I hope you can at least understand why I am prepared to defend a country I call home and love and believe in. By all means bad mouth a country and its people, but be prepared to defend yourself too. I respect you for standing up for what you believe, but I do not respect your descent into first sarcasm, and then insults and swearing. I will freely demonstrate my own ability to do so when you draw first blood however.

You work for an organization. I point this out as you are critical of my use of the acronym for the President Of The United States, presumably in an attempt to call into doubt my ability regarding the English language. The King’s English is my native tongue sir, so illiteracy should be highlighted, even by your spell checker.

“But if “POTUS” (sorry, are we in the Westwing?) is saying the right things, what’s wrong with backing him? Eh? “Either the biggest building in the world, or the biggest tax scam…and I think the American people know what it is”, said the great man of Cayman’s lovely Ugland House which is home to 18,000 companies through the magic of brass plates…”

It is perhaps too early to judge how great a man he will turn out to be, perhaps history will back up your accolade, perhaps it won’t.

You really are affected by everything you read or see on television aren’t you? It must be true because politicians or journalists say so. Shell companies and company registrations are not unique to this island, companies exist on paper all around the world. They have good reason to and some of the companies who the US are boastfully proud are registered in offshore locations for tax reasons. I believe past US governments are well aware of this and even facilitated it to ensure that US companies operating outside of the US could keep some competitive advantage. Is it wrong, immoral, corrupt? I really don’t know but it is a fact of life and business in a free market economy. Why do you think it is so clever and perceptive to remark that 18,000 companies and all their operations and staff could not be housed in a single building? That is patently obvious but their reasons for doing what they do are not necessarily as black and white as you are intent on believing.

“Er, but you said”

“We can’t afford medical insurance and have no savings.”

“Hmm….”

ASTRO ASTRO ASTROTURF!

Shouting louder is akin to the abuse I mentioned before. It is the retreat of the immature and a rather pathetic response. The playground is a distant but clear memory for me. Yes, I did say that, but like many of your ilk you don’t listen do you? Perhaps you have never heard of life insurance or pensions? As I said to Douglas in a previous comment, medical coverage is currently not something I enjoy. Did I indicate or suggest that it would never be? I don’t think I said that, but if I gave you that impression I apologize, it was before you proved you are a little challenged.

Have a nice day, sir. I hope your animosity is nothing more than the result of frustration and not the mark of the kind of man you are. If your aims are genuine in this life and you wish to uphold the rights of all free men, you should not see money as the sole yardstick. Many of the wealthy as well as the poor are deserving of a fair hearing. Quality of life is a complex equation for us all and it cannot be distilled into the neat equation of Too Much Money/Not Enough Money and anger, although an understandable emotion when faced with perceived injustice, is usually best left to cool if effective reasoning is to prevail.

Maurice

“So why bring Richard into it?

Richard has never held that deluded position. ”

Richard has certainly written that he holds that opinion. “Government spending pays for itself”. Yes, indeed he has.

That he doesn’t hold it, or that he holds it only with caveats, means he should be more careful about what he writes then, doesn’t it?

““We pay no direct taxes, but believe me, the cost of living is high here and most essential things such as food and utilities cost more than in your country.”

Well yes, that’s what happens when rich tax-exiles crowd in, driving up the cost of living, which is further componded by the government’s reliance upon indirect taxation which puts the cost of living up, regressively affecting the worse off.”

Paul, worth actually musing on hte idea that perhpas not everything is to do with tax rates.

You’ll find that food on all of the smaller Caribbean islands is expensive. For there’s not much land and a lot of people. Thus most food is imported.

There are also things like economies of scale in infrastructure: a full First World infrastructure for 60,000 people is, at least I would submit it is, more expensive per capita for 60,000 people than it would be for 6 million or 60 million.

Scale matters in economics (you know, that “economies of scale ” thing) as well as tax rates.

Tim,

So the fact that Richard is an advocate of progressive tax rates used to finance government spending is conveniently forgotten when focusing on his arguments about borrowing?

And also the distinction between borrowing for a fiscal stimulus during recession (in the UK) versus borrowing at unsustainable rates in boom times on the presumption that revenues would never fall (in Cayman) is conveniently forgotten?

This is a common trick of yours: focusing in on very specific points and choosing to ignore wider attendant issues. It makes you look very powerful because that’s what polemic achieves – but you know as well as I do that it’s disengenuous.

Indeed, we have an example in your response to me. Did I say that the high cost of living in Cayman was only due to rich ex pats pushing up the cost of living and high indirect consumption taxes? Well, I *suppose* you could read me that way, if you were inclined to do so.

And of course you are right that food imports and the lack of economies of scale increase the cost of living too.

But then, it’s obviously true that without the high indirect consumption taxes and the rich ex-pats pushing up e.g. property prices, then the cost of living would be lower than it is – although yes, you are right, the economies of scale and importing food points would still apply.

Now, again, you know this. You also know that what i said above is compatible with what i’ve said here, i.e. with your points. So why try and dress me up as a straw man for you to burn?

Seriously, don’t you ever tire of nit-picking other people’s arguments and deliberately reading them in uncharitable ways to imply contradictions and mistakes you know are only a result of exploiting ambiguities and not a reflection of what your opponent was trying to say? Wouldn’t it be more fun to progress in an honest fashion, taking people’s arguments head-on and using reason to see what answers you come up with?

Maurice,

Don’t have time to respond to your points now. Maybe later if I can be bothered (though the repetition looks like a lot of effort…)

“Seriously, don’t you ever tire of nit-picking other people’s arguments”

No. Next question?

“Wouldn’t it be more fun to progress in an honest fashion, taking people’s arguments head-on and using reason to see what answers you come up with?”

But I do take Richard’s arguments head on. I’ve even read a number of his papers for TJN and the TUC and all that and identified exactly and precisely where he has made his logical errors.

For example, when he tried to estimate the tax gap (forgive me any slight inaccuracy here, this is from memory) he first looked at headline corporate tax rates. Then he looked at actual tax rates paid and called the difference the tax gap.

However, that number entirely ignores the fact that there are tax allowances. Deliberately put there by Parliament to get companies to do things which Parliament wants companies to do. As an example, the R&D tax credit.

He even bloody well mentions this in the paper and then then just glosses it over by saying along the lines of “but undoubtedly most of this gap is tax avoidance and evasion, not tax complainace” and thus lets his initial number stand.

That’s why I make fun of all the rest of it, because the man’s writing polemics, not research.

Similarly, I was the first person in the UK to actually spot why the Stern Review’s results were so different from everyone else’s. The use of a different discount rate. (Yes, I’ve had real journos come up and tell me this).

I read The Green New Deal and pointed out the insanity of their proposal for how to raise investment for the Green part. Seriously, in a country that has been running a capital surplus for most of the past few decades they thought that lowering interest rates and imposing capital controls would lead to more capital inside the country. That’s simply insane, and I said so.

Sam T of the nef tried to claim that the nef receives no government funding. Took 30 minutes to prove her entirely and completely wrong and she cried Uncle.

Sure, sometimes it is just nitpicking: sometimes it’s finding a great gaping hole it what is about to become the next great talking point.

Troll

Blah blah blah blah. Right wing bullshit blah blah blah

Did not bother reading past the first line.

Troll

“Blah blah blah blah, Right wing bullshit, blah blah blah £

Did not bother reading past the first line.

Tim Worstell is a good example of how false the argument that we must not tax the rich or they will leave the country argument is. Not that Tim is rich of course, but he has left the country, and what damage has that done to the UK that another right wing nut has buggered off?

Answer…. None, zilch, zero.

In fact, poor little Timmy can’t keep away. That is the same thing with the fat cats, they don’t want to pay tax, but they like living in a society where their are lots of things to do and see. They and their sprogs would get bored stupid sitting on a sandy beach for the next 40 years. But hey, if they won’t pay their taxes then piss off. But they must sell up their properties, and take their sprogs out of our schools and fuck off.

“Did not bother reading past the first line.”

Might have been worth you doing so. The first line was of course a quote from Paul.

I think Sally is a little confused about many things including her own political convictions.

By her own admission she didn’t (or couldn’t) read what was being debated. I think she means me with her reference to “right wing nuts” even though she patently knows nothing about me or my life. Ironic that she exhibits so many of the unpleasant traits that the extreme right hold close to their own bosom.

I fear she is no more than a good old “fall for everything, stand for nothing” and has little to offer but hatred, anger and her potty mouth which serves to remind us of only one thing; that the gene pool has no lifeguard.

I spent the vast majority of my life living working and paying taxes in my homeland, in all probability while people like you were still throwing your own faeces at those who sired you. I still pay taxes as a matter of fact, on one pension that I receive following the death of my first wife. I could choose to change this but I don’t. The reasons I left my homeland are of course more complex than Sally could ever grasp, but perhaps one factor affecting the decision was the ever increasing societal attitudes and collapse of decent human behavior that she herself typifies.

Insults thrown at me along the lines of “good riddance, I’m glad people like you leave the country” once again illustrate that you are a bigot saddled with very low self esteem. If my analysis of you is remotely close, you are endemic of Britain’s problems and why you are sinking slowly in your own filth. You can be very proud young lady.

I think Maurice you are a terrible old ham.

Nearly as bad at Tim W but not quite…

@Daniel,

By that, I’m guessing you do not think very highly of anyone who offers a counter argument to, or a different view from your own, but it is your right to think whatever you wish of me

Cayman News Service – Peer Review Will Vindicate The Cayman Islands

http://ow.ly/15NZmg

Maurice, eloquent and interesting.

Thanks

@sli

Thank you, both for taking the time to read such a long discourse and your kind words.

Schadenfreude is an unpleasant and unflattering foundation for anyone to try and build upon, regardless of the argument, which is why I feel so strongly.

FACT CHECK:

Anthony Travers, Chair of the Cayman Islands Financial Services Association is not what I’d call a great source for impartial views on the Caymen’s problem.

I’ll say it again. I think Maurice is wrong, but what do I know? He comes across as an extremely likeable chap.

It seems clear to me that the way out of the Cayman Islands financial problems is to tax their banks, perhaps as a one off windfall contribution, or in a way that benefits their inhabitants, like Maurice, over a longer term.

It’s obvious innit? You tax what you’ve got….

@Daniel

Misdirection of that nature is hardly constructive. Of course he’s not impartial. Impartiality has nothing to do with this. The people at the vanguard of the attack can hardly lay claim to it either, so why should it be any different for those on the defensive?

@Douglas

Whatever our overall differences of opinion, I think we would both agree that the one solution that would not work would be to ignore it in the hope it goes away.

I spoke out against the spiteful and unpleasant characterization of a people and a nation by those who know nothing about them. As far as the future fiscal plans for the islands, I hope that cool heads will prevail.

I maintain that countries like Britain and the US are scrabbling to try and divert the world’s attention from the true depth of the economic black holes into which they have driven themselves. Denying the islands the right to borrow to cover a shortfall seems not only hypocritical as we have, I think, agreed, but it suggests a more complex and disturbing attitude too.

Moving forward however, I hope that the powers that be in Cayman will learn much from the situation, curb wasteful spending and put their house in order and institute sensible sustainable revenue generation ideas for the future that will have the least damaging impact on all concerned, both businesses and individuals.

The attempt by the UK to force direct taxation on the islands through underhanded political means leaves a very bad taste in the mouth. Maybe that’s because living here I’m far from “impartial”, but I would hope it leaves the same bad taste for anyone who recognizes injustice and dirty politics when they see it.

OH NOEZ!

MIZZ CAYMAN ISLANDZ IZ CANCELLED!