Consider the non-scandal generated by the "Leak" of the Panama Papers. What piques my interest is the absolute lack of names of North American Politicians, Celebrities, Tech-bazillionaire, and Hedge Fund hot shots.
The UK Prime Minister apparently knew somebody on the list, and the Prime Minister of Iceland was forced to resign when his name showed up there. Here in the USA, a couple of small-time crooks stashed some cash in case they had to leave the country in a hurry. Some democrat-connected Beltway lobbyists were engaged in lobbying on behalf of a Russian bank that was on the list. But a big nothing.
I read that Walter Wriston said, "Capital will always go where it's welcome and stay where it's well treated." For the most part, here in the USA, people can acquire great wealth but also be relatively secure that their wealth will not be arbitrarily taken from them. As long as that is true, there will not be a lot of demand for "off-shore" or anonymous bank accounts. The wealthy of this country would still rather have their money here anyway. And because it is here, it funds more wealth creation.
If the government were to try to confiscate the wealth of Zuckerberg, Gates, Schmidt, Bezos, Ellison, and Balmer, it would destroy the country. First, the wealth of these plutocrats, for the most part, can't be confiscated, only destroyed; it still has the form of knowledge and process, not things. The government could probably get a little bit of the wealth of Buffet, Soros, and Koch but not much. Second, once the government confiscated the wealth of the richest of the rich, no one possessing wealth would ever bring it into the country or work to create it here if there were better alternatives.
How bizarre; congressmen calling for higher taxes on corporations, then scrambling to try to block them from leaving the country. Right, who's going to pay for all his great ideas?
No comments:
Post a Comment