US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3556

On April 06 2016 06:23 cLutZ wrote:


Obviously it would not solve the problem, it would, however, reveal the problem, which is half the problem: that one side denies a problem even exists.

[...]

On April 06 2016 05:26 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:
is this even legal outside of dealing with dictatorships?



http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-35971035

upon reading it im confused if he's just talking about money by people here illegally or everyone from Mexico.

On April 06 2016 07:47 oneofthem wrote:
the corporate media reacts with glee at sanders stumbling

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/04/05/9-things-bernie-sanders-shouldve-known-about-but-didnt-in-that-daily-news-interview/

On April 06 2016 08:00 Mohdoo wrote:
GH, care to weigh in on the Sanders interview?

On April 06 2016 08:01 Gorsameth wrote:

is banned for 2 days

On April 06 2016 07:59 CannonsNCarriers wrote:


Bernie was revealed to not have a grasp on how to actually take on Wall Street, despite having based his whole campaign around taking on Wall Street. It is not too much to ask that single issue politicians actually have some expertise or concrete plans on how to do something about that issue.

The Panama Papers sent ripples across the globe Monday after revealing that 140 politicians from more than 50 countries, including Russian President Vladimir Putin and Iceland President Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson, were linked to offshore accounts set up by the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca.
Despite its breadth, the scandal so far has barely touched American individuals and companies. There were no mass protests, as occurred in Iceland where protesters demanded the resignation of Gunnlaugsson; no U.S. leaders were forced to deny accusations of tax evasion as Putin did.
How have Americans so far escaped the biggest leak of financial data of all time? It’s not because wealthy Americans don’t use offshore bank accounts to avoid U.S. taxes: they do—to the tune of $1.2 trillion in 2014, according to one estimate. Some professors have suggested that Americans may have disguised their accounts at Mossack Fonseca behind another party. But there’s also a more structural answer, tax experts say—one that has to do with shifts in global financial policy—and, to an extent, taste.
Tax evasion overall is a far larger problem in developing countries, where norms around paying taxes are weak and rules designed to stop such evasion are ineffective. And when wealthy Americans do want to evade taxes, they turn to Bermuda, or the Cayman Islands, or Singapore. They don’t park their money in Panama.

...

One place Americans can hide assets, though? The United States. Experts point out that it's stable, it's safe, and the laws make it fairly easy to structure your holdings – legally – to keep taxes low.
“Not too surprised,” Zucman wrote in an email about the lack of Americans in the Panama Papers. “Part of the reason is that it’s unfortunately way too easy to create anonymous shell companies in a number of US States like Delaware and Nevada, so no need to go to Panama.” In fact, multiple international organizations rated the U.S. as one of the world’s biggest tax havens last year.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2016/04/the-panama-papers-where-are-the-americans-000083#ixzz44zvnXgG2
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

Read more: http://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2016/04/the-panama-papers-where-are-the-americans-000083#ixzz44zvNZppN
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

On April 06 2016 07:52 farvacola wrote:
cLutZ is being willfully ignorant as to the very obvious fact that any voting ID requirement is going to necessarily come alongside a stronger oversight of state voting procedures; the notion that requiring ID's is somehow going to solve problems is naive, and the notion that requiring ID's is necessary to identify the problems in the voting system puts the cart before the horse in terms of how highly cherished the right to vote is. Further burdening the right to vote in the interest of smoking out issues with voting procedures is an inappropriate way to do things.

On April 06 2016 08:00 Mohdoo wrote:
GH, care to weigh in on the Sanders interview?

On April 06 2016 08:47 cLutZ wrote:


How am I ignorant of that? Lots of states have ID requirements, and they usually have in kind procedures for ID verification (every state has scannable IDs, its simply a matter of updating polling to fit with the times, which I also support).

Also, I said I am perfectly willing to drop the ID idea if the FBI debunks my sincere belief that in person voter fraud absent an ID requirement requires nothing more than a willingness to violate the law + internet access (or a library card).

On April 06 2016 08:57 CannonsNCarriers wrote:


Other Bernie fans I have seen on Twitter respond with something like:

"Only a Hillary fan would see that as a damning interview. His answers were thoughtful. Seeing ignorance is evidence of the viewer's Hillary bias."

Even as the death penalty grows out of favor in the United States, the number of executions worldwide has risen to its highest level in 25 years, a new report on the death penalty from Amnesty International finds.

The human rights group recorded 1,634 executions in 2015, a number rivaled only by a three-year period beginning in 1988.

James Clark, Amnesty's senior death penalty campaigner, says the numbers can seem a bit misleading because the rise was driven mostly by three countries — Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, which accounted for 89 percent of all executions.

"The spike in executions, particularly in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, leads to this global number that is so much larger than we've ever seen in recent years but that belies the fact that it's happening in such a small number of countries around the world," Clark said.

The global trend, Clark said, is clear: The death penalty is in decline worldwide.

The United States, which executed 28 people in 2015, was for the seventh year in a row the only American country to execute. But lately, the U.S. has significantly curtailed its use of capital punishment.

The U.S. arm of Amnesty International points out: "As of April 1, 2016, a total of 18 U.S. states have abolished or repealed the death penalty, and a total of 9 U.S. states have not conducted an execution in at least a decade — meaning that, for the first time since capital punishment was reinstated in the U.S., a majority of states have halted the death penalty in either policy or practice."

As we've reported, the death penalty has become historically unpopular among American voters and its use is also becoming increasingly rare.

Exit polls in Wisconsin show Cruz 10 points ahead of Trump. Based on the formula I described earlier, that would point toward an 8- or 9-point win for Cruz when combined with pre-election polls. The margin of error is high enough, though, that while a Cruz win is likely, it isn’t quite certain. Hence, ABC News and other networks aren’t likely to call the race until some actual votes come in.

The same pre-election poll / exit poll blend would have Sanders beating Clinton by 9 percentage points in Wisconsin. Note, however, that the Decision Desk HQ Democratic exit poll is more favorable to Sanders than the one put together by the networks, and suggests he could beat Clinton by double digits.