4 ms·

>> Richmond Voyager, under the Bahamas flag, Are they using tax haven flags to dodge taxes? just to be saved by a tax paid millitary...

givemeethekeys 3y ago
A small price to pay for free shipping for Made not in America.
bpodgursky 3y ago
Expensive oil is good for several of the world's worst governments, which are mostly propped up by high prices (Russia, Iran, Venezuela). It's in the interest of the US (and moreso, most of the developing world) to keep oil prices from spiking due to shipping insecurity.
mcpackieh 3y ago
Not just taxes, but regulations (treatment of workers, etc)
azinman2 3y ago
A very astute point. Unfortunately people cry foul when their gas prices go up, so no real political pressure otherwise.
deanCommie 3y ago
The US military intervenes in world affairs in the interest of geopolitical stability, which benefits the taxpayers that pay it. But even if that's not the case, do you believe that if you are a tax dodger (individual or corporate) that you no longer should be: * Helped by the state department such as being given protection at a consulate on foreign soil if being threatened by a foreign nation? * protected by the military if your life is in danger in international waters? * helped by an emergency room if your health is in danger on home soil? This feels like a position akin to screaming at a police officer trying to give you a ticket that "I'm a tax-paying citizen, you work for ME"
- synetic 3y ago
  There’s a huge difference between helping out a citizen who has broken the law by dodging taxes and helping out a corporation that purposefully evades U.S. regulations. People rate higher than corporations. At least they should. Note that the State Department does charge people when they are evacuated from a foreign nation.
  - SllX 3y ago
    If you live in a world where the entirety of a corporation was paperwork and robots, that’s a very astute point. Unfortunately I live in a world where corporations are made up from the investments and works of people (and paperwork, some robots sometimes), including the people whose bodies were on that boat. Do you want to trade?
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - synetic 3y ago
      If the U.S. has the right to intervene when non U.S. flagged vessels owned by a U.S. company are stopped by a foreign government does, say, North Korea have the right to intervene when North Korean owned ships are stopped by the U.S.?
      - SllX 3y ago
        They can try. We can say whatever we want on the land about what folks at sea do, but the truth is on the sea, the bigger gun wins. The US Navy polices the worlds oceans. Not should, nor can, nor might, nor has considered doing so, but does and has done so for decades; and Iran already knew this, as does North Korea, and this does sometimes include intervening when a hostile power attacks non-American flagged vessels.
        synetic 3y ago
        … but the truth is on the sea, the bigger gun wins. Yes. So why go through the rigmarole of trying to justify the actions when it comes down to we do it because we can and our leaders think it’s in our interests.
graton 3y ago
I believe for a ship to be US flagged it must be built in the US, use a US crew, and follow US rules. Which makes things relatively expensive. https://www.cnbc.com/2015/04/28/us-ship-definition-by-flag-or-cargo.html https://www.cnbc.com/2015/04/28/us-ship-definition-by-flag-o...
jcranmer 3y ago
> Are they using tax haven flags to dodge taxes? Not just to dodge taxes, but also to dodge pesky things like worker regulations.
renewiltord 3y ago
The US military enforces sea peace across the globe. e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_Task_Force_151 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_Task_Force_151 Pax Americana has yielded the American people great benefits. It is in this nation's interests to preserve global sea trade. When the benefits accrue so much to America, it is in America's interests to intervene on behalf of everyone - even those who won't pay. Something people often make a mistake with is positive externalities. There are many things that have positive externalities. Others having children is what keeps the country running in your old age when you have none; keeping your country's Western border safe helps you even if your state is miles away in the East; ensuring children are all educated and fed helps even if you will have none; ensuring your population is employed will help even if you don't need to work anymore; ensuring others can take public transit along your route helps even if you must drive; treating people who can't pay in emergency rooms helps you even if you will be forced to pay. Nations which realize this build a strong collective identity which lets them see assistance of their fellow man as assistance of self, bypassing the innate "why my money spent on him" complaint.
- jemmyw 3y ago
  It hasn't only benefited the US but everyone except those who specifically reject it. It has hugely befitted China having peaceful and open global trade. Now they want to burn it out from underneath themselves thinking they'll gain some kind of advantage by replacing the American system. "We don't want YOUR peace" so to speak. Not that the USA or American system is perfect, but if it's a choice between that and the others on offer...
  - renewiltord 3y ago
    Yeah, I really enjoyed A Splendid Exchange which talks about this massive good and enjoyed Disunited Nations for one hypothesis of the future.
  - bobzibub 3y ago
    What the article didn't mention was that the US has pirated (ahem) "commandeered" Iranian oil tankers as well. This is an ongoing dispute between these two countries. Iran violates US sanctions, but technically they are merely US sanctions which have the legal weight of say Togo's sanctions on the high seas. (Togo doesn't enforce their domestic law on the high seas, nor can they.) The simplest way to get Iran to stop compandeering tankers is for the US to do the same. They don't want our "peace", it is true. "Peace with Piracy" is just not compelling to the Iranians. Can you blame them? Likewise, China benefits from trade near her borders but the US and allies want the ability to turn off the spigot when they wish to force China into concessions, as has been noted in US geopolitical articles for decades now. Note the Australian nuclear submarines deal: They don't really want to protect their trade with China...from China, they want the ability to control trade between China and her allies. These subs would do part of the job, with the bulk of it done by the USN. Enjoy a comedy skit on that subject: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sgspkxfkS4k https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sgspkxfkS4k

givemeethekeys 3y ago

A small price to pay for free shipping for Made not in America.

bpodgursky 3y ago

Expensive oil is good for several of the world's worst governments, which are mostly propped up by high prices (Russia, Iran, Venezuela). It's in the interest of the US (and moreso, most of the developing world) to keep oil prices from spiking due to shipping insecurity.

mcpackieh 3y ago

Not just taxes, but regulations (treatment of workers, etc)

azinman2 3y ago

A very astute point. Unfortunately people cry foul when their gas prices go up, so no real political pressure otherwise.

deanCommie 3y ago

The US military intervenes in world affairs in the interest of geopolitical stability, which benefits the taxpayers that pay it. But even if that's not the case, do you believe that if you are a tax dodger (individual or corporate) that you no longer should be: * Helped by the state department such as being given protection at a consulate on foreign soil if being threatened by a foreign nation? * protected by the military if your life is in danger in international waters? * helped by an emergency room if your health is in danger on home soil? This feels like a position akin to screaming at a police officer trying to give you a ticket that "I'm a tax-paying citizen, you work for ME"

synetic 3y ago
There’s a huge difference between helping out a citizen who has broken the law by dodging taxes and helping out a corporation that purposefully evades U.S. regulations. People rate higher than corporations. At least they should. Note that the State Department does charge people when they are evacuated from a foreign nation.
- SllX 3y ago
  If you live in a world where the entirety of a corporation was paperwork and robots, that’s a very astute point. Unfortunately I live in a world where corporations are made up from the investments and works of people (and paperwork, some robots sometimes), including the people whose bodies were on that boat. Do you want to trade?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - synetic 3y ago
    If the U.S. has the right to intervene when non U.S. flagged vessels owned by a U.S. company are stopped by a foreign government does, say, North Korea have the right to intervene when North Korean owned ships are stopped by the U.S.?
    - SllX 3y ago
      They can try. We can say whatever we want on the land about what folks at sea do, but the truth is on the sea, the bigger gun wins. The US Navy polices the worlds oceans. Not should, nor can, nor might, nor has considered doing so, but does and has done so for decades; and Iran already knew this, as does North Korea, and this does sometimes include intervening when a hostile power attacks non-American flagged vessels.
      - synetic 3y ago
        … but the truth is on the sea, the bigger gun wins. Yes. So why go through the rigmarole of trying to justify the actions when it comes down to we do it because we can and our leaders think it’s in our interests.

graton 3y ago

I believe for a ship to be US flagged it must be built in the US, use a US crew, and follow US rules. Which makes things relatively expensive. https://www.cnbc.com/2015/04/28/us-ship-definition-by-flag-or-cargo.html https://www.cnbc.com/2015/04/28/us-ship-definition-by-flag-o...

jcranmer 3y ago

> Are they using tax haven flags to dodge taxes? Not just to dodge taxes, but also to dodge pesky things like worker regulations.

renewiltord 3y ago

The US military enforces sea peace across the globe. e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_Task_Force_151 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_Task_Force_151 Pax Americana has yielded the American people great benefits. It is in this nation's interests to preserve global sea trade. When the benefits accrue so much to America, it is in America's interests to intervene on behalf of everyone - even those who won't pay. Something people often make a mistake with is positive externalities. There are many things that have positive externalities. Others having children is what keeps the country running in your old age when you have none; keeping your country's Western border safe helps you even if your state is miles away in the East; ensuring children are all educated and fed helps even if you will have none; ensuring your population is employed will help even if you don't need to work anymore; ensuring others can take public transit along your route helps even if you must drive; treating people who can't pay in emergency rooms helps you even if you will be forced to pay. Nations which realize this build a strong collective identity which lets them see assistance of their fellow man as assistance of self, bypassing the innate "why my money spent on him" complaint.

jemmyw 3y ago
It hasn't only benefited the US but everyone except those who specifically reject it. It has hugely befitted China having peaceful and open global trade. Now they want to burn it out from underneath themselves thinking they'll gain some kind of advantage by replacing the American system. "We don't want YOUR peace" so to speak. Not that the USA or American system is perfect, but if it's a choice between that and the others on offer...
- renewiltord 3y ago
  Yeah, I really enjoyed A Splendid Exchange which talks about this massive good and enjoyed Disunited Nations for one hypothesis of the future.
- bobzibub 3y ago
  What the article didn't mention was that the US has pirated (ahem) "commandeered" Iranian oil tankers as well. This is an ongoing dispute between these two countries. Iran violates US sanctions, but technically they are merely US sanctions which have the legal weight of say Togo's sanctions on the high seas. (Togo doesn't enforce their domestic law on the high seas, nor can they.) The simplest way to get Iran to stop compandeering tankers is for the US to do the same. They don't want our "peace", it is true. "Peace with Piracy" is just not compelling to the Iranians. Can you blame them? Likewise, China benefits from trade near her borders but the US and allies want the ability to turn off the spigot when they wish to force China into concessions, as has been noted in US geopolitical articles for decades now. Note the Australian nuclear submarines deal: They don't really want to protect their trade with China...from China, they want the ability to control trade between China and her allies. These subs would do part of the job, with the bulk of it done by the USN. Enjoy a comedy skit on that subject: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sgspkxfkS4k https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sgspkxfkS4k