Offshoring Bank Accounts

it's true public money is often squandered but without taxes there wouldn't be a state and there wouldn't be an economy. I like having things like law enforcement, firefighters, universal healthcare and roads.

>universal health care
Kek

>I'm here to ask if offshoring bank accounts --while legal-- does it damage the economy in any way, and is it just a rich man's escape from tax?
You might need to be more specific because as a fairly regularly migrant between 2 countries, I have several 'offshore bank accounts' and they do nothing but stimulate the economies of the respective countries they are homed in.

also fair isn't arbitrary, we live in a democracy and a nation of laws. If you think the tax burden is overly high on you then you should elect leaders to change that rather than ignoring the law because you don't like it.

>universal healthcare

So me, a responsible healthy young person, can subsidize fat fucks who eat McDonalds and smoke 20 packs a day?

I'll pass.

The government is good at providing some services, namely those which exhibit the free-rider problem. National defense, law enforcement, firefighters, roads are all fine. Sadly such basic services could be afforded with a fraction of tax revenue. Instead we tax the shit out of people and waste it on a laughably bloated military budget and welfare for niggers.

>elect leaders to change the laws instead of ignoring laws

Rich people with offshore accounts aren't ignoring laws. They also donate money to get specific leaders elected for certain favors. I don't care about offshore accounts because it hardly effects me

Do you understand what health insurance is?

It's a pool of money everyone contributes to, so that in the event one of the members becomes ill, the pool of money is there to pay their expenses.

OK so I had my turn, now - explain to me what universal healthcare is.

I can still be a member of said pool and be neet and still reap the same benefits as a hardworking taxpayer.

It's a nice and dandy concept but it misses an incentive for people to actually care about their health so the pool won't be used up fast.

Health insurance you still have to pay monthly for, or you receive a fine. Healthcare providers can charge an arbitrary amount, and many raised their rates after the past few Healthcare bills that forced them to provide insurance for everyone, and to not deny coverage. It's controversy stems from the fact that about 20% of the population uses 80% of the resources for Healthcare.

>It's a pool of money everyone contributes to, so that in the event one of the members becomes ill, the pool of money is there to pay their expenses.

Correct.

But most people are fat fucks. If you are above the mean in terms of health then universal healthcare is a losing proposition. If you're one of the aforementioned fat fucks then sure, it sounds like a fabulous idea.

I eat healthy. I don't do drugs. I work out. Why the fuck should I be paying the same as someone who eats McDonalds, smokes, and sits on their ass all day?

I'm not immune to health issues. Shit happens. And that's why insurance exists - but you should be able to seek the most reasonable rate in the free market based on your health conditions instead of being forced to subsidize people who make poor life decisions.

That is very true. It's also true for unintentional NEETs. Yet, there's a reason NEETs have bad teeth and broken bodies - they don't leech 'the system' in order to maintain peek fitness, do they?

I don't see how private health insurance offers any incentive whatsoever. FWIW I live in a universal healthcare country and also pay for private health insurance because I can afford to - and it makes me exempt from much of the govt contribution.

Again, you're making some generalization that people in America with private health insurance are star athletes. It's a bazaar idea. You are absolutely paying a fat cunts heart surgery. You know your boss? The fat cunt who smokes? Also always eats take out? Yeah. He's got primo health insurance.

I wouldn't pay for health insurance either if my job didn't provide it. I am perfectly capable of managing my health expenses myself.

>fair share
Person A works like crazy, work is their whole life. Person A kicks in $50,000 a year for taxes

Person B has a shit job, no plan to change it. Person B likes to shitpost and get high. Person B puts in $2,000 a year in taxes

>person A should pay more % because he afford it....
Really Bernie? Are you sure that seems fair?

until you get into a car accident and the medical bill is six figures that is

I won't get into a car accident because I don't drive, and six figures is what most people pay in 2 years of premiums so even if I do get in a car accident once every 2 years I will still be ahead.

You don't need to drive to get into a car accident or get hit by a car, or have someone's negligence some how or some way affect your health negatively.

Well, it's a lot like Communism, but Person A can afford that taxing, however unfair it is, Person B will probably die if he doesn't get those social services.

We must ask ourselves if we should feel compassionate for lazy fucks who don't even attempt to find a job, though. I only approve of social services for the disabled and homeless, that's it, I don't want America to become Detroit; a jobless welfare nation, I'd preferably like as little social services as possible in exchange for people that get to work instead of getting fat watching Maury Povich re-runs.

And if that happens I'll be glad to pay for out of my own pocket from the tons of money I saved on not paying $1000 a month premiums.

this desu

Insurance companies are basically just casinos. They must take in more than they pay out, necessarily. For most people the premium is worth the reduced variance but if you're wealthy then insurance will be a net drain.

This tons of money, is it liquid or cash equivalent? Because if it's not and youre incapacitated then you're screwed. You can't necessarily go after the person who put you there (if it was negligence or something like that) because that takes forever and they might not have any assets. You're essentially fucked

Of course it's liquid.

>I can't see any incentive even though I use private healthcare
we lad

Anyways,
>Again, you're making some generalization that people in America with private health insurance are star athletes.

Actually anons healthcare pre 2008 (if user was employed with no prior history or family history of illness) probably had better rates than pro athletes healthcare. Pro/Star athletes are significantly more likely to get injured. What user was complaining about was that his health insurance prices are at a good rate because he doesn't have to pay for the obese guy's heart surgery or the smokers chemo because they would likely be denied coverage.

Even if user didn't, don't hospitals have payment plans?

I use public healthcare for day to day stuff. I use private healthcare for hospital stays. If the copay on private is too much, I can just choose to go public.

So I pay less tax because I have private cover, but the cost of private is less than the tax savings so I can only win.

Nice try though, keep feeling super

The rich don't need to pay a fair share. It's not their fault they worked hard to earn their money while your retarded ass was doing nothing.

do you seriously think $1k/month is anywhere near the average cost of healthcare?

Adapt or die. The feds have no right to take my private property to fund something I find morally abhorrent. Fuck off bootlicker.

You live in your country because "the feds" allow you to. Because they build it so that you can live there, using your and others' money. Go live in the middle of the pacific if you don't like it.

also
>private propriety
Which you took from them to begin with, with money that was printed by them.

They actually do

'Eminent domain'

Of course they will pay you fair market value

People unable to work didn't just starve to death before the welfare state. Church, charity, begging, family, and creative solutions helped them. The middle ground between laissez faire and socialism is untenable, and, as the commies over at leftypol are wont to put it, depends on cheap products from countries were the proletariat is "oppressed" by a capitalist system. If all countries in the world are social democrats like in Europe, then no country can be.

I think he means moral right not legal right.