I have always argued that offshore is a mechanism created by capital to launch an assault on democracy. That is exactly what is written all over this suggestion. Macquarrie are making it clear that people’s choice to elect a government that might seek to take into public ownership the utilities that serve them should not matter: the ‘fiduciary duties’ of capitalism come first.
I would suggest Macquarrie are too late. First, saying it proves the public case against them. Second, the potential for this to happen is already foreseeable and so is not protected by treaties.
But the broader signalling is more important, and clear this morning. First we have Dyson demanding the UK behave like a tax haven. Now we have a warning that tax havens must be used to subvert the democratic choices of the UK population.
It feels as if class warfare has been declared.
The declaration was made by those like the Senior Lecturer who decided that anything owned by rich people should be nicked.
When it comes to subverting the democratic choices of the UK population, can anyone think of an example where the UK population has expressed its opinion through a referendum but where Captain Potato is all for subverting that democratic choice?
I can’t quite put my finger on it.
“anything owned by rich people should be nicked.”
Except the definition of “rich people” is, like many other terms used by our favourite WGCE, “fluid”.
Wasn’t one of the complaints about the big trade agreements that they gave corporates rights to take govt to court over these sort of things, the trans Pacific one that all the liberal lefties hated until Trump pulled the plug at which point it was suddenly a terrible missed opportunity etc.
FYI
a nice comment just appeared on spud-you-deplore
No doubt it will not last very long
Totally amazed
Another question
The man has no answers
The USA is a tax haven. So says Capt Potato
Diogenes captain potato said that houses were a tax haven. When I pointed out that this defied his own definition of a tax haven ie it was abroad and had legislation designed to benefit foreigners’ he told me that I was an idiot and it was his game and he could change the rules if he liked.
“I have always argued that offshore is a mechanism created by capital to launch an assault on democracy”
The fallacy of reification….Capital has no agency: it’s merely an abstraction.
So Murphy–like his on-off pals in ZaNu–wants to ensure that no one can get their money overseas to prevent UKVenezuela-style theft by Cob-bog & MNcNasty.
Is it another vermine ploy?
The USA and Germany are tax havens. Lol.
“Second, the potential for this to happen is already foreseeable and so is not protected by treaties”
I see. Remind me never to sign any contract with you Rochatd..
Theo, reification is the fundamental flaw in Marxism and, therefore, the shit that people like Dillow churn out. What they write has no identifiable connection with reality. But it seems to allow no-hopers such as academic economists to earn a crust
“I have always argued that offshore is a mechanism created by capital to launch an assault on democracy”
“The idea of foreign entities seeking to protect their interests in the event of nationalisation angered Labour politicians.”
How dare the sheep protest the result of the vote! The wolves have carried the day, and the dinner menu is now decided!
Democracy is invoked as if it were a talisman, but it’s oppressive without respect for the rights of individuals, including property rights. And corporations have rights too, as do the corporations’ shareholders.