Tax Theft: Luxembourg. Impotence: All Over. Culprit: GOP?

Great Evasions From Taxes And Responsibility. Krugman Accuses Republicans Of Everything

When cheating is legal, is it cheating? Many worthies in Europe are affecting surprise that Luxembourg allowed hundreds of the greatest plutocratic corporations to escape amounts in taxes similar to the “austerity” they try to impose. That means that tax evasion by the richest is paid by the poorest.

Tax avoidance, through Luxembourg alone, by the richest persons in the world, are of the order of 10% of the yearly Federal Budget of the USA (you will not see this in the newspapers, I computed it myself).

Burning Cars May Move Minds (Brussels, 11/6/14)

Burning Cars May Move Minds (Brussels, 11/6/14)

People are starting to see through this Kabuki theater. While Luxembourg flaunted its criminal nature, there was a bloody demonstration in Brussels against renewed “austerity” (from a new “conservative” government). No less than 20% of the capital’s population was in the streets, French and Flemish speakers united. Two police officers were grievously hurt.

Demonstrators burned cars, but did not set fire (yet!) to the European Commission and Parliament buildings. Let me be clear: the European Commission and the European Parliament have known, for years, of Luxembourg’s dirty nature. I have written of this institutionalized thievery, for years. It has been known, for years. All the politicians are accomplice… Indeed, none of them protested stridently against institutionalized tax stealing.

Jean-Claude Junker was the Prime Minister of Luxembourg, for 19 years, and, thus, Luxembourg’s thief in chief (plus 5 years, prior, as Luxembourg finance minister). Junker’s punishment? He is now head of the European Commission. It is eerie, surreally obscene, a tiny bit as if Himmler had been made president of Israel (in the last few days of WWII, Himmler cooperated with the Swedes to save thousands of Jews! Both were obviously trying to make amends, while Nazism was suffering its well deserved apocalypse. Some will say the comparison is exaggerated; however, EU austerity-tax cheating by fat cats has killed probably thousands of people already).

Satanic corporate officers would show up in Luxembourg, and, within the same business day, organize the tax evasion of their employer, with the full participation of the authorities of Luxembourg.

Luxembourg whined that an illegal act had been committed: state documents had been revealed (28,000 pages on 340 companies, obtained by a consortium of journalists, ICIG; they have a consortium… to escape national censorship; many firms paid less than 1% on profits, whereas the law is 12.5%; other countries are cheating, including, Eire, the Netherlands, and the UK). Infamy knows no shame.

But one does not need to rob the state thugs of Luxembourg to expose the truth about Luxembourg. The industry of Luxembourg is organized crime.

According to the most recent data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis about $95 billion of profits moved into Luxembourg from U.S. companies in 2012 alone. In Luxembourg, those $95 billion of profits were basically not taxed. Direct investment from the U.S. into Luxembourg in 2013 was $416 billion. More than 200 U.S. companies operate there.

Luxembourg’s GDP per capita in 1961 was $2,200 (yes, two thousand dollars). Now it is more than 120,000 dollars. Only the tax cheaters Liechtenstein (140 K) and Monaco (180 K) are richer. What to do, when a country thrives from thievery? Why don’t the French and Germans send a few special forces?

Here is a description from the prime financial channel of the USA, CNBC. Here is the start of the associated text: “Here’s an international money riddle for you: What country is smaller than Rhode Island yet is the most attractive place for companies and investors to park their money, behind the United States? Ireland? Cayman Islands? Try Luxembourg.”

Notice that CNBC admits implicitly that the world’s greatest tax cheat is the USA itself (banking secrecy is often total in the USA, with shell companies, “charities”, “trusts”, and “Dark Pools”). And so it is.

So don’t ask why Obama did nothing for the USA. Ask why he should have done something against his sponsors.

And then rolled another editorial of Paul Krugman, accusing the Republicans of the “Triumph Of Wrong”. Said he :

“From Day 1 of the Obama administration, [republicans] have done everything they could to undermine effective policy, in particular blocking every effort to do the obvious thing — boost infrastructure spending — in a time of low interest rates and high unemployment.

This was, it turned out, bad for America but good for Republicans. Most voters don’t know much about policy details, nor do they understand the legislative process. So all they saw was that the man in the White House wasn’t delivering prosperity — and they punished his party.”

The usual flood of comments approving that childish and irresponsible vision flooded in, as a self-congratulatory orgasm of surrealism. My own comment was completely lost in that self-loving flood.

The truth, though, is that the democrats were in total control of Congress, the White House, and had a super-majority in the Senate (allowing to override filibusters), in the beginning of Obama’s reign. That was highly problematic, as the Democratic Party is controlled by plutocrats.

What were they going to do? Legislate against themselves? Discover that Delaware enables even more tax evasion than Luxembourg, as long as one is really very rich? Not embarrassed, the plutocratic owners ad operators of the “Democratic” Party accused Republicans “of doing everything they could”, to have, presumably, psychologically forced Democrats to do nothing anti-plutocratic.

I pointed out that, on November 5, 2008, Obama went to work at a hedge fund, in Chicago. That should have alerted the so called “progressives”, that something was not quite right (I certainly noticed!). But it did not. Even six years later, the (pseudo-) progressives still do not get it.

How long will it take for We The People to realize the present governmental set-up, complete with its attending pundits, is a plutocratic mood organization? I guess, as long as the New York Times keeps on censoring me, there is little hope. But then, why do I send money there?

Habits are hard to break. Ultimately, ideas break down, when people start breaking things down. This is how it was always done. Ultimately, violence is not just a political activity, but a psychological one, because it requires a lot of energy to break out of old systems of thought, and even more, out of old systems of mood.

Let see what Europeans worthies do, having named a thief in chief as head of the European Commission, and now seeing the rabble raise in a fury. A hint: if next time demonstrators make it to the European Parliament, breaking and burning, said Parliament may reach a clearer, and more cautious mood.

Austerity? You want austerity? Then why not start with the plutocrats?

Patrice Ayme’

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , ,

19 Responses to “Tax Theft: Luxembourg. Impotence: All Over. Culprit: GOP?”

  1. ianmillerblog Says:

    I agree that the tax cheats should be brought down, that Luxembourg, etc, are facilitating crime, effectively acting as receivers, BUT I think you are a bit tough on Obama. Put it this way: do you really think the rich are going to pay more tax under the Republicans?

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      “A bit tough on Obama”? In the first three months, he passed no significant legislation, WHATSOEVER. It was all about saving the giant banks, and their managements, whatever it took. (Ironically the CEO of AIG is now suing the government of the USA, for bailing AIG under too onerous conditions, he says…)

      Now, of course, he has Summers in command, and Summers is the one who had instituted the monstrous financial system (they Republicans did not… Although they were OK with it)

      Right now plutocratization is fully on, because the tax rates on large capital are way insufficient to stop its exponentiation. In retrospect, it would have been better to have the Republicans in charge 6 years ago (instead of Paulson and Summers), and the Progressives becoming really progressive.

      Obama, Peace Be Upon Him, right now, whether he understands it, or not, is just a regressive in progressive clothing. He can talk like me all he wants, he mainly did the opposite. Financial reform did not happen. Crackdowns were mostly directed at Switzerland (to grab market share).

      The term “rich” has also to be defined. People with income from work can all be classified as poor, because they pay more than 50% tax. The real rich, the plutocrats, have an imposition rate which, as I said, is not enough to reduce the growth of their capital.

      Anyway, the record speak for itself: in 2006, Congress became “Democratic”. Contemplate the disaster. Congress just turned “Republican”. It would be surprising if it got any worse.

      BTW, W. Bush, whom I detest, passed Medicare Part D (Seniors pay for their drugs no more). That was a clear progress (Obamacare is not a clear progress, to put it mildly, and the main reason for the “Democrats” defeat.)

      • ianmillerblog Says:

        A bit difficult for me to argue with you here because I agree with a lot of what you say. I do not define people who earn salaries as “rich”, except possibly some Wall St banksters, who happen to be down at the bottom of my slime list. The very rich pay very little tax in the US, which is wrong, but I cannot see the Republicans fixing that. For my money, the real problem for the US, and for the rest of us as a consequence, is the trillions and trillions of dollars debt. The next US President is not going to have an easy time, whichever party he (or she) comes from.

        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Hmmm… Don’t get me wrong: I am not friendly to “Republicans” (although I have some in my family, they became Obama’s best friends, as soon as his prospects looked good). Just, de facto, Obama turned into an excellent Republican president (arguably better that way than W. Bush).
          Ironical.
          The trillions of debt are nothing that a bit of inflation cannot vaporize. Eisenhower would have an easy time: he would put a 93% upper margin tax, and reflate the economy through massive public works. What Obama ought to have done.

          The present “Republican” crowd is sub-plutocratic, they aspire just to serve their masters. If they came to power, there might be a panic among the “Democratic” plutocratic crowd… But not to worry: For example, Google, while claiming itself green, has been secretly supporting climate deniers…

          • ianmillerblog Says:

            Hmmm, looking at some of the chattering classes on the web, a numb rod right-wingers would not support your assertion that Obama was a better republican the Bush.

            Yes, taxing the wealthy would sort out the debt, but I can’t see the republicans doing that. However, I guess we shall see.

            • Patrice Ayme Says:

              Ian two things:
              Republicans’ rank and file hate Obama, but their masters love him. The Republicans will NOT pay the debt, they never do, and they don’t care. A bit of inflation will get the debt out of the way. I don’t know what will happen because it depends about the next 6 months. There are some bad types in the Republican party (Cruz, etc.), it’s not clear which people/policies will dominate. Right now it’s the oldest, safest, who are in command.

              My whole drift is not how sweet things are. It’s that Obama has been the Republican party in disguise, and that greatly because the prominent “Progressives” did not have enough understanding, let alone a plan. The only well organized branch of the Democratic Party was the plutocratic one. All they know is money, money, money. Obama is certainly the president who spent the most money getting money from the hyper rich, ever. He makes Reagan look like a monk.

            • ianmillerblog Says:

              Patrice, you seem to be against the American way of life. Horrors! It has always been like this. John Adams came from a more or less modest background, got to be President, but it did not take long for the powers the be to dump him. Quincy, by some miracle, also got to be President, and when he tried to change things, he was quickly dumped. Now you cannot get anywhere near power without the expenditure of massive amounts of money, so your friendly plutocrats are a necessity. As an aside, I do not admire this way of doing things at all, and I feel that America would do better by cleaning up its own system than trying to impose “democracy” on others. As for the “progressives”, in that system of entrenched interests, how could they possibly change anything?

            • Patrice Ayme Says:

              Hmm… Agreed! This deserves an essay all by itself, Ian! Maybe I do this right away!

            • ianmillerblog Says:

              I await further developments 🙂

            • Patrice Ayme Says:

              Yes, I am posting the answer-essay to your comment, Ian. That’s more relaxing than “Theory of Mind” one I had in mind, prior… I need to relax after climbing 2 days ago, and a hard mountain run yesterday… 😉

        • pshakkottai Says:

          See this data on the economics of monetary sovereignty at
          https://mobile.twitter.com/StephanieKelton/status/389441574993526784/photo/1
          The balance is
          FISCAL DEFICIT – TRADE DEFICIT = PRIVATE
          SAVINGS- PRIVATE INVESTMENTS = NET PRIVATE SAVINGS
          Every $ of created money becomes a $ of wealth. We do not need taxes at all.The source of money is FISCAL DEFICIT a gold standard term used to confuse people. See the red area in the plot is equal to the blue area plus or minus the green area (foreign trade.) Unfortunately Europe is not monetarily sovereign being run by Goldman Sachs.

          • Patrice Ayme Says:

            Dear Partha: I do agree with all this. I am not fully sure about the equation yet, but as I explained to a Japanese business man recently, if Japan defaulted on its 240% of GDP of government deficit, that would just acts as a tax. It could be done by compensating for the destitute with services or special subsidies.

  2. Chris Snuggs Says:

    “Jean-Claude Junker was Prime Minister of Luxembourg, for 19 years, and, thus, Luxembourg’s thief in chief. His punishment? Head of the EC!”

    Chris Snuggs: Indeed. And the Germans got him elected. They wil regret it. This Luxembourg tax-avoidance scandal will run and run and poison Juncker’s Presidency. He’ll have to go but with GIGANTIC pension paid for by YOU.

    Some of Juncker’s statements:

    “‘We decide on something, leave it lying around and wait and see
    what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don’t understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back,’ he said of the euro.”

    “In May 2011, he told a meeting of the federalist European Movement that he often ‘had to lie’ and that eurozone monetary policy should be discussed in ‘secret, dark debates’.”

    “He (Mr Juncker) also sparked controversy by suggesting that the
    eurozone economic policy was incompatible with democracy. ‘We all know what to do, we just don’t know how to get re-elected after we’ve done it,’ Mr Juncker cynically quipped last year.”

    “Mr Juncker was also closely linked to the EU constitution, before
    the French referendum on it in 2005 he predicted, correctly, that Europe would ignore any popular rejections.“If it’s a Yes, we will say ‘on we go’, and if it’s a No we will say ‘we continue’,” he said.”

    “Following the No votes in France and the Netherlands, Mr Juncker
    claimed that in reality voters had actually supported deeper European integration, triggering accusations that the European elite was in denial over public hostility to the EU. ‘If we were to add up all the votes of the people who wanted ‘more Europe’ as a yes , then I think we would have had a yes vote,’ he said.

    And from Gorbachev, ny hero:

    2012 – “The most puzzling development in politics during the last
    decade is the apparent determination of Western European leaders to re-create the Soviet Union in Western Europe.” – Mikhail Gorbechev (Gen. Sec of CP, USSR 85-91)

    http://eurevealed.wordpress.com

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Well Gorbachev himself drove the Soviet Union in the ground (not that it make me cry). And now he uses his tears to clean Putin’s dirty hooves (or claws? Can’t tell, too dirty down there…)

      Germany itself, or more exactly Merkler Merkel, can’t give lessons: over 6 years the economy grew there by a miraculous grand total of 2% (yes, in totto). Merkel can’t tell the difference between a wreck and paradise. The worst being, of course, that, until very recently, the rest of the Eurozone was completely persuaded of the veracity of Merkel-Weidman-Deutsches Bundesbank thesis, namely that austerity was the way.

      Germany is not even 1/3 of Eurozone GDP, France-Spain-Italy is more than 1/2… So the latter followed the former, because of lack of ideas. See Belgium, for the same lack of ideas. On that point, curiously, Cameron and company have not been as bad (although of course Russian plutocrats help)….

  3. Nathan Daniel Curry Says:

    Nathan Daniel Curry

    I guess this is as good an example of why I find the mainstream news organisations and journalists on our planet fairly pathetic; because very very few of them have anything to say of any import or value.

    Imagine if the 10 o’clock news lead with such a story: ie: “It seems we have been duped for decades by plutocrats in bed with Luxembourg and this is the real sickness of our economy…and this is what we as individuals and as a collective can do about it.” (now that would be NEWS). We give far too much of our power away to indifference and authority figures that aren’t worth the respect we project on to them. Why else does the plutocratic elite get away with this?:

    https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/…/tax-theft-luxembourg-im…/

    But instead what we call news is some myopic story about a two party political system that has no fundamental differences or balls and the lackeys that prop up such nefarious noise. Or some bloody royal baby. Feck!

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Thanks Nathan! The system is ever more corrupt and satanic, because people’s minds have been stuffed with the wrong explanations and obsessions. As you say. Journalists have to earn their keep. There used to be several hundreds owners of newspapers between the USA and the UK. Now there is around five (5). Even someone such as Krugman, and certainly the rest of the new York Times, can only toe the plutocratic line… Lest they get jobless (as many do, even at the New York Times, right now…)

  4. gmax Says:

    As long as there are no blood and flames in the Plutos’ exclusive areas, nothing will happen

  5. “American” Way Of What? | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] Morality Without Intelligence Makes As Much Sense As Will Without Mind. Intelligence Is At The Core Of Humanism. « Tax Theft: Luxembourg. Impotence: All Over. Culprit: GOP? […]

What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: