Pope To Condemn Tax Havens

[La_Dolce_Vita]

You don't HAVE to take a grant. Surely a principled man like you is well aware of how the government got the money to pay you that grant - from companies sucking reveues out of the tax systems of other countries which you yourself have stated you think is wrong.

 

 

I do HAVE to take the grant if I wish to gain an education. In a society where education is heavily orientated towards the needs of business it should not be me who pays for it, nor any other worker.

 

What if the Island was not a tax haven, it would mean no finance sector and a very much reduced population, but if I was a member of that population it would still be the government where I would have to apply to gain an education. Because I am an Isle of Man resident the only way I can gain access to and recognition of my education is by gaining access to monies from the government. The current system in the Isle of Man and in most countries is one where education is treated as a privilege, which it should not be, education should be free for all. So it would not matter, non matter where I am from or go I would need to get financial support to have an education unless I was in some poor nation whose government could not pay for such things because of the existence competitive taxation.

 

In accepting the grant monies I am not being hypocritcal for 'revelling' in the benefits of the Island's system, if monies are actually coming from these companies it is all the better for such companies are responsible for paying for my and others education because as these companies employ staff it is their duty to pay for such education and training necessary to doing the work.

 

Though you may know better than me about this, I was under the impression that these offshore companies do not pay very much tax on the Island at all and that it was the population of the Isle of Man through taxes that pay the majority of monies towards student education. Am I wrong in thinking this?

 

You're turning out to be a bigger hypocrite than most of the other hypocrites on here.

 

Not at all. As an anarchist I am compelled to pay taxes in this society regardless of my views, so does this mean that because I do not believe that people should be taxed that I should not use a system that I have paid into? I believe that money and wages should eradicated, but I use money and accept my wages. This does not make me a hypocrite as the unfortunate situation is that I could survive without either of these things.

[manshimajin]

I would refer my learned friends to that great work of reference insofar as the Catholic Church and its finances are concerned:

 

Godfather III (the one where Michael gets religion)

or alternatively:

 

[P.K.]

I don't see what John Cleese has to do with any of this...

[hboy]

I do HAVE to take the grant if I wish to gain an education. In a society where education is heavily orientated towards the needs of business it should not be me who pays for it, nor any other worker.

 

I'm glad other people are reading this and its not just an argument in a pub. You wouldn't get the grant in the UK you'd have to take out a student loan (ie, pay for your education yourself). So really its back to your general arrogance and 'holier than thou' attitude - why should YOU pay for your education when people who pay more tax than you do in the UK have to. YOU have the right to have the money don't you. DESPITE the fact that YOU don't believe in paying tax as an anarchist, or that you've stated on record that you think the way the IOM raises its revenue is wrong.

 

However you can sponge and ignore the issue because YOU are more important than anyone else.

 

Because I am an Isle of Man resident the only way I can gain access to and recognition of my education is by gaining access to monies from the government. The current system in the Isle of Man and in most countries is one where education is treated as a privilege, which it should not be, education should be free for all. So it would not matter, non matter where I am from or go I would need to get financial support to have an education unless I was in some poor nation whose government could not pay for such things because of the existence competitive taxation.

 

Yes but you object to how the economy that pays your grant functions which makes you a HYPOCRITE taking the money. Plus if education should be free for all and you don't believe anyone should pay tax how do you suggest you get your free education. Magic beans?

 

In accepting the grant monies I am not being hypocritcal for 'revelling' in the benefits of the Island's system, if monies are actually coming from these companies it is all the better for such companies are responsible for paying for my and others education because as these companies employ staff it is their duty to pay for such education and training necessary to doing the work.

 

Wafer thin justification there I'm afraid. You stated in previous posts that all that happens in employment is that your wages are theft because you don't get the full value of your labour - but now here you expect them to pay for your free education on top as well which totally defeats your argument about what workers benefit from through employment.

 

Though you may know better than me about this, I was under the impression that these offshore companies do not pay very much tax on the Island at all and that it was the population of the Isle of Man through taxes that pay the majority of monies towards student education. Am I wrong in thinking this?

 

How do you think they make the money to pay the wages of the staff they employ and who pay the taxes you benefit from. Your typical of most principled people in that your full of shit when challenged and fail to see that your compromising your own position by benefiting quite generously from a system you state you dislike and are idealogically opposed to.

 

As an anarchist I am compelled to pay taxes in this society regardless of my views, so does this mean that because I do not believe that people should be taxed that I should not use a system that I have paid into?

 

If you stood by your principles, which you clearly don't, YES.

[Mr. Sausages]

I did not have a choice in where I was born and have no choice in the manner in which I can achieve an education necessary to gaining employment. Because I am an Isle of Man resident I must take a grant. If I was a UK resident I would take a loan.

 

If you're at university, you (presumably) already have more than enough education necessary to gain employment, and that education has been provided free by the state. You've (presumably) opted to take advantage of the qualifications that you have already obtained, and use them to gain further qualifications, which the majority of people choose not to do, or are unable to do. Going to university is not forced upon anybody. You've opted in.

[pongo]

In a society where education is heavily orientated towards the needs of business

 

Seems to be all about training these days - rather than education. Which is a pity.

 

Personally I am not totally comfortable with universities offering, so called, degrees which are really just modularized training courses. A bachelor's degree should be a much broader sort of education IMO.

 

Plenty of time for professional training after university.

[manxy]

It had to happen - not only will we be under review from the UK and the USA but now we are in line to be excommunicated and condemned to eternal damnation:

 

Pope

 

I guess that Signor Calvi will be there to greet us all...

 

This was interesting too.

Pope thingy link

 

and even better

Another Pope whatsit

 

Is charity taxable?

[La_Dolce_Vita]

If I was in the UK then yes I would have to take a loan. But I am not from England, and could not get a loan on the Isle of Man if I wanted one. Besides if I were from the UK and received a grant I would be accussed by you of being a hypocrit for the same reasons.

There is no 'holier than thou' attitude, as I said, education SHOULD be free for all as there should be no impediments to a person learning and becoming educated. I don't believe that people should be taxed, yet I pay tax because I have to.

 

I pay taxes and the companies who pay their taxes on the Island have a responsibility in the current system to contribute to people's education. My disagreement is with the fact these particular companies are only on the Isle of Man to avoid paying higher levels of taxes in other countries.

Education SHOULD be free for all, but in a capitalist society it is the workers through their taxes that pay for it and much of the education system is geared to meeting the demands of the workplace. I suggest that there be no government and that the learning process is not tied to the needs of work, and education would be free in a society where money does not exist.

 

How do you think they make the money to pay the wages of the staff they employ and who pay the taxes you benefit from

 

This distinction here between the company directly paying taxes to the government and income tax from citizens is that it effectively means that the people are paying for education themselves, the company is only paying the wages and from a conventional perspective not satisfying its responsibility in paying for education itself.

And from the logic of your argument if I came from the Isle of Man I cannot criticise the Island's system, if I came from the UK I could not criticse that system, etc. It would take for me to come from one of these poor countries most severely affected by the existence of competitive taxation for me to not be a hypocrit.

 

If you stood by your principles, which you clearly don't, YES.

 

Wrong, my principles are compromised because I HAVE to pay taxes and I use governent services? Can you propose an alternative? Or are there no alternatives but to simply accept the system as it is and shut up?

 

If you're at university, you (presumably) already have more than enough education necessary to gain employment, and that education has been provided free by the state. You've (presumably) opted to take advantage of the qualifications that you have already obtained, and use them to gain further qualifications, which the majority of people choose not to do, or are unable to do. Going to university is not forced upon anybody. You've opted in.

 

Correct, I did, but am I right in thinking that you believe the goal of education is solely for the purpose of finding work? And education is not provided free by the state, it is paid for by the population (but you know this). But going back to what I was saying earlier, the acceptance of a grant is no different criticising my views on the Isle of Man because I have worked and been educated on the Island.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

In a society where education is heavily orientated towards the needs of business

 

Seems to be all about training these days - rather than education. Which is a pity.

 

Personally I am not totally comfortable with universities offering, so called, degrees which are really just modularized training courses. A bachelor's degree should be a much broader sort of education IMO.

 

Plenty of time for professional training after university.

 

Yeah I agree, it justs seems more and more that the cost and purpose of education is just to get workers who know what they are doing as soon as they reach the workplace. But this is in place of actually allowing people to really reach their full potential in terms of learning and expressing their intellectual potential. If workplaces want capable workers then they should pay for it themselves.

[Mr. Sausages]

Correct, I did, but am I right in thinking that you believe the goal of education is solely for the purpose of finding work?

No, I don't think that, and I can't see why you've made that assumption.

 

You're argument for taking a university grant was "I do HAVE to take the grant if I wish to gain an education" and it was you who connected it with being necessary to gain employment. My point, if I have to repeat it again, is that you DON'T HAVE to take a grant to gain an education. You, and anyone else, CHOOSES to do so. I'm not criticising that choice, it's a good choice to have, so let's not pretend that it's not a choice.

 

And education is not provided free by the state, it is paid for by the population (but you know this).

 

Yes, I do know this, so what's your point? Books have to be paid for, buildings need to be paid for, teachers need money to buy food. This is done by the state. You're saying education should be "free for all", and it is provided as "free" as it can be (up to the age of 18, and even after that there's help from our govt).

 

What's the alternative? Some fantasy world where books magically write themselves, teachers don't need food, and buildings magically build and repair themselves?

[La_Dolce_Vita]

No, I don't think that, and I can't see why you've made that assumption.

You're argument for taking a university grant was "I do HAVE to take the grant if I wish to gain an education" and it was you who connected it with being necessary to gain employment. My point, if I have to repeat it again, is that you DON'T HAVE to take a grant to gain an education. You, and anyone else, CHOOSES to do so. I'm not criticising that choice, it's a good choice to have, so let's not pretend that it's not a choice.

 

Ah I see, I was saying that if I wished to gain an education past that which I already have to find a good job and also to simply learn I would need to go into university which requires funding. I am not pretending it is a choice, but there is no other choice if I wish to continue learning.

 

Yes, I do know this, so what's your point? Books have to be paid for, buildings need to be paid for, teachers need money to buy food. This is done by the state. You're saying education should be "free for all", and it is provided as "free" as it can be (up to the age of 18, and even after that there's help from our govt).

 

What's the alternative? Some fantasy world where books magically write themselves, teachers don't need food, and buildings magically build and repair themselves?

 

What I mean is that financial costs should not be involved or serve as impediments to education. Obviously in a capitalist system, however, costs are attached to resources, services and goods. But everyone should be able to continue to learn and educate themselves as much as they wish without financial constraints getting in the way. Though this would not work in a capitalist system.

[Mr. Sausages]

Ah I see, I was saying that if I wished to gain an education past that which I already have to find a good job and also to simply learn I would need to go into university which requires funding. I am not pretending it is a choice, but there is no other choice if I wish to continue learning.

 

OK, so you've opted for education that requires funding. If you can't fund it yourself then you can get a grant (thanks to the Manx tax system!). I did the same and went to uni too. That was a few years ago now, but my education is continuing in a way specific to my work through a professional body. My employers are funding this, which is pretty common these days. So it's not necessary to go to uni on a govt grant to learn, but yes, education does have to be funded.

 

What I mean is that financial costs should not be involved or serve as impediments to education. Obviously in a capitalist system, however, costs are attached to resources, services and goods. But everyone should be able to continue to learn and educate themselves as much as they wish without financial constraints getting in the way. Though this would not work in a capitalist system.

 

You're going on about anarchism again then? I'm not getting dragged into that again. Thanks for the option though.

 

Back to thread - all a "tax haven" is, is a place with it's own tax regulations that are lower than neighbouring countries'. Mainly because they don't raise taxes to fund wars etc. Maybe that's why the pope doesn't like them.

From wiki:

 

Most economic commentators suggest that the first "true" tax haven was Switzerland, followed closely by Liechtenstein. During the early part of the twentieth century, Swiss banks had long been a capital haven for people fleeing social upheaval in Russia, Germany, South America and elsewhere. However, in the years immediately following World War I, many European governments raised taxes sharply to help pay for reconstruction effort following the devastation of World War I. By and large, Switzerland, having remained neutral during the Great War, avoided these additional infrastructure costs and was consequently able to maintain a low-level of taxes. As a result, there was a considerable influx of capital into the country for tax related reasons.

 

How much has Iraq cost the UK taxpayers?

[pongo]

The Swiss also armed both sides during both world wars and have also generally done rather nicely out of their neutrality.

 

And actually - isn't neutrality sometimes about not being prepared to stand up and express a point of view?

 

ETA: the Swiss have one of the world's largest arms exporting industries. They are not just about lovely clear water and fresh mountain air.

[Tugger]

I feel sure one could elect not to take one's grant entitlement

[Lonan3]

Why is my hard-earned money being spent on attempting to provide an education for someone whose capacity for learning appears to be so limited?