Jacanuk's forum posts

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

20281

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

29

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 20281 Posts

@Serraph105 said:
@Jacanuk said:

Will be interesting to see how long it will take before these people are behind bars again.

But bad that they now get it back, if you are a criminal you have clearly said no to being a part of society.

These are people that have already served their time and repayed their debt to society. Hence, your argument is bullshit.

Does it remove the fact that the chose to be criminal in the first place?

But to be clear I donĀ“t mean they never should get it back, I have a problem with them getting it back as soon as they are released from prison since most have not served the full time.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

20281

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

29

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#2 Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 20281 Posts

Will be interesting to see how long it will take before these people are behind bars again.

But bad that they now get it back, if you are a criminal you have clearly said no to being a part of society.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

20281

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

29

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#3 Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 20281 Posts

Easy answer No.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

20281

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

29

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#4 Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 20281 Posts

I have not nor would I ever "boycott" something because of how they act politically.

If I enjoy their product then I will support them,

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

20281

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

29

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#5  Edited By Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 20281 Posts

@zaryia said:
@Jacanuk said:
@HoolaHoopMan said:

Do you just string simple words together and hit enter? My god...we've already been over it being a tax, but rather it's a tax on the importer.

Try not to troll so hard, an obvious troll is just an obvious one.

Mexico is not paying for the shitty wall that most Americans do not want (or one that most republicans never cared for until Trump came along with his memes - it's all tribal). Bookmark this post.

Well, if the administration does not either tax the pretty decent amount being sent to Mexico each year than yes you are right they wonĀ“t

Trump is on his year before the election so this is his last chance.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

20281

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

29

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#6 Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 20281 Posts

@HoolaHoopMan said:
@Jacanuk said:
@HoolaHoopMan said:
@Jacanuk said:

And that would be correct if I was not talking about putting an actual tax on anything any Mexican company brings across the border to America.

The same way you put a tax on money transfers digital or physical to and from Mexico, which last year was 2.6billion so not a small number.

What? You literally said tariff. A tariff is paid by the importer.

A tariff is a tax so same thing.

You may want to go read up on the definition before making a fool of yourself.

Do you just string simple words together and hit enter? My god...we've already been over it being a tax, but rather it's a tax on the importer.

Try not to troll so hard, an obvious troll is just an obvious one.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

20281

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

29

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#7 Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 20281 Posts

@horgen said:
@Jacanuk said:
@horgen said:

Want to defeat tax loopholes? Get countries to work together on it. Pay taxes where the money is earned.

Will never happen,

Countries are too dependent on their sovereignty.

They worked somewhat together to open up these loopholes.

Some journalists investigated Nike in Europe this summer or the previous one. According to US headquarters, Nike Holding Europe had about 1.3 billion $ in surplus before taxes, yet Nike Holding Europe reports to the government in Netherlands (where the offices are) a loss at about 50 million $.

The money stream went something like this when a purchase is made in Norway: Some are left in Norway to cover salary and other expenses linked directly to selling in Norway. Rest is sent to Nike company in Netherlands which has a few expenses linked to sponsoring different soccer clubs. What is left after that is sent to Nike Holding Europe. Which apparently only rents the Nike logo and name from US and the bill for renting is always larger than the surplus.

Yep, if you look at the EU, the loopholes come by an idea of a global world where trade and services can be moved across borders with the same ease as if it was inside to stimulate trade among nations.

And itĀ“s not just Nike, Apple reportedly keeps around 90% of their total revenue abroad in tax-shelters like Ireland and The Netherlands simply because they can and does not have to pay tax, think it was 0.0005% tax Google was reported to have paid and which they got fined by the EU.

But some countries are doing something internally, i read that Germany and some other EU countries are going to put an extra tax on these big companies so they canĀ“t avoid it, which is kinda crazy and i canĀ“t wait for this to come to the courts.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

20281

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

29

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#8 Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 20281 Posts

@horgen said:

Want to defeat tax loopholes? Get countries to work together on it. Pay taxes where the money is earned.

Will never happen,

Countries are too dependent on their sovereignty.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

20281

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

29

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#9 Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 20281 Posts

ROFL the OP sure loves sarcasm

Anthem a blockbuster game LOL, what a joke.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

20281

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

29

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#10 Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 20281 Posts

@LJS9502_basic said:
@blaznwiipspman1 said:

@luzarius: that's why I said no point in raising taxes like that on the rich when they will just pack up and move. The best thing to do is to get rid of government protections and open up competition in the free market. Gut patents, trademarks, contract laws, anti free market regulations and let the rich really face strong competition. Right now the government provides protections to the rich that shouldn't be there and that wouldn't exist in a real free market. Imagine if there's not 1 but 5 different apple corporations. Or 5 different Google's. The people would benefit the most from this arrangement.

Most countries have a higher tax rate so where are they movie? A third world country.

Which countries have a higher tax rate than 70%

I canĀ“t think of any but you must know of some since you claim it.