Althouse: "If you don't live here and feel no responsibility for supporting the country, why would anyone care if you decide to renounce your citizenship?"

December 8, 2014

"If you don't live here and feel no responsibility for supporting the country, why would anyone care if you decide to renounce your citizenship?"

"There are plenty of people in the world who WANT to be Americans. Many of them come here, contribute to the country and want to become citizens. Those are the real Americans, not the folks who inherited the moniker but seem to think they have no responsibility for the contributing anything to the country."

That's the second-most-liked comment at a NYT op-ed by Jonathan Tepper, who's giving up his American citizenship because "the burden and cost of onerous financial reporting and tax filing requirements... are neither fair nor just." ("The I.R.S. doesn’t tax the first $97,600 of foreign earnings, and usually doesn’t double-tax the same income. So most expatriates owe no money to the I.R.S. each year — and yet many of us have to pay thousands of dollars to accountants because the rules are so hard to follow.")

63 comments:

damikesc said...: Why should the IRS tax any foreign earnings, out of curiosity?

I could've sworn I heard from Progressives that questioning one's patriotism was bad.; 12/8/14, 6:56 AM
Bob R said...: That's a strange comment. On the one hand I agree that it doesn't make me feel bad if someone has chosen a new home and decides to renounce citizenship, but by what measure is filing out the paperwork required by our tax code "supporting the country?" I believe our tax code is an obscene embarrassment. But that has to do with the intrusive paperwork that has to be filled out by millions, not one expat.

By the way, there are rumblings among the tax prepared community that on April 15, when the Obamacare taxes kick in (and the paperwork that goes with them) we are going to see protests that will make the web site rollout and the "if you like your plan, you can keep it" debacle seem like a picnic. We will see.; 12/8/14, 6:59 AM
MayBee said...: The US is one of the few countries that taxes its citizens and corporations abroad. It's greedy.
The US has created rules to make it difficult to transfer money from the US to the country in which you live, even relatively small amounts. Finally, the US government needs to know if you have had, at any time during the year, over $10,000 in a foreign bank account, even if it is money you paid taxes on in the US.
The US government is nosey and greedy with regards to its citizens living overseas.; 12/8/14, 7:02 AM
rhhardin said...: It hardly matters how complex the tax code is if software deals with it.

The first year in new circumstances is a huge bother but if you do the same thing every year the software will default to it after that.; 12/8/14, 7:10 AM
Bob R said...: MayBee didn't need to include "with regards to its citizens living overseas."; 12/8/14, 7:11 AM
rehajm said...: The burden for US expat filing a tax return is indeed cumbersome, but the major problem is the burden the US places on foreign financial institutions and corporate entities in accounting for US expats. Many simply won't deal with US expats at all. Imagine not being able to open a bank or investment account because of your US passport.; 12/8/14, 7:11 AM
MayBee said...: Those are the real Americans, not the folks who inherited the moniker but seem to think they have no responsibility for the contributing anything to the country."

I do agree with Bob R about this comment.
What "responsibility" to contributing "anything to the country" does she think someone living and working abroad have in order to qualify as Americans? What does this commenter think the person living and working abroad is getting out of being American?

Are only people who pay American taxes "real" Americans? That's what this comment seems to say. That's pretty interesting if you apply it to people living in this country.; 12/8/14, 7:12 AM
MayBee said...: rhhardin- there is no software that I know of that is geared toward an expat. At least there was nothing that worked for our particular circumstances.; 12/8/14, 7:14 AM
JSD said...: US Citizens are taxed on worldwide income, and get a tax credit on foreign taxes paid. The problem lies in the complicated tax preparation and disparate treatments of income between countries. You could end up with foreign sourced income being taxed in America. There are lots of filing requirements; you have to report all foreign bank accounts and reporting foreign losses can be problematic.; 12/8/14, 7:15 AM
Bob R said...: Software helps with the work, but it just makes the tax code more opaque. I have no idea if I am in compliance with the law. In fact, I'm convinced that the law is contradictory so they can come after me any time they want. I have no real idea if I'm paying more or less than other people in my situation, so I have no idea if the code is fair. I just answer the questions that TurboTax asks, sign the check and hope for the best.; 12/8/14, 7:16 AM
rehajm said...: An American family living in Germany that buys five or six different German-domiciled mutual funds to create a diversified portfolio is faced with tax complications that almost defy belief. They will have to report each of their six non-U.S. mutual funds on separate forms, every year. The IRS Instruction manual for this Form 8621 estimates that the time needed to prepare the form include "Recordkeeping, 15 hr., 4 min; Learning about the law or the form, 11 hr., 13 min; Preparing and sending the form to the IRS 20 hr., 21 min."

Furthermore, once the filing is made, the tax payers will find their investment gains taxed annually and subject to a tax rate no less than 39.6%, and potentially much higher.

-from American Expats Tax Nightmare; 12/8/14, 7:20 AM
Anonymous said...: I thought we all knew by now that being a real American has nothing to do with anything but "contributing to the economy". (Or at least, contributing to the personal economy of people who can afford lobbyists.) It's a corporation, not a nation. If you don't love the corporation you're working for, we'll sack you and get better employees from elsewhere.

(And yes, the IRS can be a very expensive pain in the ass to expats.); 12/8/14, 7:23 AM
rehajm said...: One more...

In Malaysia, a modest, local family business was thrown into financial turmoil when the authorities discovered that because one of the founder's daughters, a partial owner of the business through a family trust, married an American and took U.S. citizenship. The entire business was, as a result, subject to complex U.S. accounting and U.S. tax reporting requirements.; 12/8/14, 7:24 AM
Anonymous said...: Bob R: I have no idea if I am in compliance with the law. In fact, I'm convinced that the law is contradictory so they can come after me any time they want.

IME not so much contradictory as arbitrary, as in "you and any other reasonable person (even tax accountants) wouldn't construe Rule X as applicable to your situation, but we've decided to slap it on you anyway. 'Cause we can."; 12/8/14, 7:33 AM
harrogate said...: The term "world's smallest violin" comes to mind here.; 12/8/14, 7:34 AM
Ann Althouse said...: "Why should the IRS tax any foreign earnings, out of curiosity?"

The IRS has to monitor efforts at tax evasion. You're missing the prior questions: How do we know when earnings are foreign and what kind of earnings are genuinely foreign? People are going to try to structure things to make earnings look foreign if it's to their advantage. There's inherently going to be a problem with making it either too easy or too hard. Whether the balance is right, I don't know.

It's a separate problem whether American taxes create too much incentive to evade by making income look foreign. But once the incentive is there, you have to make it hard to evade the taxes.; 12/8/14, 7:42 AM
MayBee said...: The IRS has to monitor efforts at tax evasion.

The root of the problem is: the US government thinks it is entitled to tax revenue from any money any US citizen or entity earns anywhere in the world.

From there, we get to the tax evasion/tax compliance issues.; 12/8/14, 7:54 AM
MayBee said...: The US government shouldn't start with the assumption some American guy working in Paris is there as some elaborate tax avoidance scheme.

Or anyone transferring money via paypal to a bank account in Japan is part of an elaborate money laundering scheme.

But that's what they do, because they want to wring every last dollar out of us.; 12/8/14, 7:57 AM
tim maguire said...: MayBee said...Are only people who pay American taxes "real" Americans? That's what this comment seems to say. That's pretty interesting if you apply it to people living in this country.

One of the many problems with a comment so stupid I'm not surprised it's one of the most liked. It's the kind of opinion even the person voicing it doesn't believe. But it sounds nice if you don't think about it too much.; 12/8/14, 8:13 AM
PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...: This reminds me of the Burger King/Tim Hortons issue of a few months back.

BK is owned by Brazilians and operates in many countries around the world.

Because it is incorporated and domiciled in the US, Brazilians have to pay US taxes on earning that they get from BK sales in Japan.

If this makes sense to anyone, I'd be curious how.

Yet they caught a lot of flak for moving their corporate domicile to Canada(?). Even though they continue to pay the same amount of US taxes on US operations as ever.

It is just plain nuts.

John Henry; 12/8/14, 8:19 AM
Tank said...: Which Americans (who have income) do not want to avoid dealing with the Tax Code?

When Tanks' kids were growing up, "we" were saving college dollars in a couple of funds in their names (it was their money via various gifts). Some funds had some foreign investments. Omigod. With less than $1,000 of annual income their tax returns were literally (yes!) 25 pages each. No tax was due. But it cost me hundreds of dollars to pay someone to do the tax returns (which, frankly, I had no idea if they were correct or not).

Yeah, I'd like to stop that insanity too.; 12/8/14, 8:24 AM
PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...: Bob R: Of course you have no idea if you are in compliance with the law. None of us do. We all make a pretty good faith effort to be but there are just too many laws, some of which contradict themselves. Not just on taxes.

Here's why:

“Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with.”

Atlas Shrugged

That was written 60 years ago. Do you think the situation has gotten better or worse in the intervening years?

How many felonies will you commit today? (Me, I'm pleading the 5th)

John Henry; 12/8/14, 8:27 AM
damikesc said...: The first year in new circumstances is a huge bother but if you do the same thing every year the software will default to it after that.

...unless you're head of the Treasury Dept, when you can ignore the software and your employer's info on taxes and still get the job running the department in charge of the IRS.

How do we know when earnings are foreign and what kind of earnings are genuinely foreign?

Our current system certainly isn't helping. It's so complex that it is simply easier to renounce citizenship.

It's not a bad thing on the people doing it. It is a bad thing on our part for having such an insane tax system in the first place.; 12/8/14, 8:28 AM
PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...: Let's remember Eric Garner.

He died because of our tax system.

(Selling untaxed cigarettes)

John Henry; 12/8/14, 8:29 AM
tim maguire said...: MayBee said...The US government shouldn't start with the assumption some American guy working in Paris is there as some elaborate tax avoidance scheme.

Unfortunately, it is standard government practice to assume everyone is in violation and put the burden on the individual to prove compliance (i clearly recall the effort and expense I once had to put into proving that the elderly handicapped woman living on Manhattan's Upper East Side wasn't active duty military personnel stationed overseas).

It creates all the wrong incentives--excessive compliance costs and, because government bears so little of the burden, excessive regulation.; 12/8/14, 8:31 AM
Tank said...: PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...
Let's remember Eric Garner.

He died because of our tax system.

(Selling untaxed cigarettes)

John Henry

Respectfully, I think it's more accurate to say it was a consequence of the War on Drugs. The Taxes are merely the tool chosen for the job there.; 12/8/14, 8:40 AM
PB said...: When they finally build a fence on all borders of the US it will be to keep people in, not keep people out.; 12/8/14, 9:00 AM
JSD said...: News articles about taxes are invariably missing pertinent facts, too simplistic or just plain wrong. People wouldn’t pay $200 - $300 hours (or more) if the problem could be explained in a short article.
The US loves to tax foreign income and give you a credit for foreign taxes paid, but unsympathetic to people reporting foreign losses. Mexican cartels can steal your business and drive you out of the country, but reporting the loss is a nightmare.; 12/8/14, 9:09 AM
jimbino said...: Amerikans living abroad also have no access to Obamacare, Medicare or Medicaid, regardless of how many years they may have paid taxes into those programs.; 12/8/14, 9:15 AM
holdfast said...: A lot of Americans living overseas, and even foreigners married to Americans, are getting fired by their local banks, because the banks don't want to deal with US compliance issues. In international tax, the US really is acting like a huge bully, bullying its citizens and its friends and allies. The IRS truly is the face of Ugly America.; 12/8/14, 9:22 AM
SteveR said...: because the rules are so hard to follow.

So hard? Pobrecito!; 12/8/14, 9:22 AM
jimbino said...: Some years ago, I carried $32000 down to Brazil on my body to buy a piece of property. Of, course I had to declare the funds at the airport, and then I had to carry the declaration form with me as well.

Dumb. I not only had to hide the money, but the declaration form as well. The gummint not only doesn't serve the people, it sets them up for robbery.; 12/8/14, 9:25 AM
Jason said...: Here's a piece I wrote last year on this very issue:

http://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/investing/2013/feds-cracking-overseas-tax-evasion/

I actually learned a lot from the comments, as this piece really seemed to strike an emotional cord with people.; 12/8/14, 9:36 AM
Jamie Bee said...: It's one thing to closely monitor American citizens living in the US who have foreign holdings. Sure, by all means, the IRS can and should monitor those types of accounts to make sure that nothing nefarious is going on. A US citizen residing in the US has ready access to all the US banks, mutual funds, stocks, retirement plans, etc. - why would such a person really need foreign holdings, anyway? It raises suspicion just on the face of it.

But rules created to stop tax evasion should NOT apply to US citizens who work and live abroad, who are mostly not wealthy and who are mostly just trying to live their lives as best they can in their foreign environment. We hold a checking and savings account in our foreign country of residence because how else would we deposit our (foreign) paychecks or pay our (foreign) bills? That doesn't make us tax evaders - any more so than Americans living in the US are tax evaders for holding these types of US-based accounts. And to suggest we might be just by dint of living overseas is, frankly, insulting -- and possibly even a violation of the equal protection clause.

(And, by the way, we don't actually get any particular benefits of US citizenship while living abroad, so it's not like we'd be getting something for nothing by not filing or reporting our foreign earnings. We don't use your roads, your schools, your public services, your hospitals. We pay exorbitant taxes to our country of residence for all those services.); 12/8/14, 9:52 AM
DanTheMan said...: I think we should tax all foreigners living abroad.; 12/8/14, 9:57 AM
Balfegor said...: ""If you don't live here and feel no responsibility for supporting the country, why would anyone care if you decide to renounce your citizenship?""

An excellent question!! If only the US government took the same generous attitude towards renunciation of citizenship as every other free country. And indeed, it used to. Alas, in the 21st century, apparently afraid of an exodus of wealth and talent, the US has thrown up barriers to renunciation of citizenship, principally the treatment of accumulated wealth as "income" subject to capital gains tax during the tax year in which you renounced citizenship.; 12/8/14, 10:04 AM
Michael K said...: "Blogger harrogate said...
The term "world's smallest violin" comes to mind here."

Says the government employee with a taxpayer funded pension.; 12/8/14, 10:21 AM
harrogate said...: Michael K:

I'm a government employee? Are you sure? Or are you just once again, engaging commenters in bad faith?; 12/8/14, 10:29 AM
Wince said...: What kind of scrutiny does money being wires out of the US receive?

Is that exported cash checked against taxes paid or public assistance benefits received?; 12/8/14, 10:38 AM
Balfegor said...: What kind of scrutiny does money being wires out of the US receive?

My impression is it receives some, but less than one might think. I'm looking into purchasing some property overseas, so I consulted with my bank, and they basically said that since they can see where the money into my account is coming from, and most of it has been sitting in my account for a long time, they wouldn't expect my wires to be held up.; 12/8/14, 10:42 AM
Fritz said...: DanTheMan said...
I think we should tax all foreigners living abroad.

Ah, the Roman plan.; 12/8/14, 10:48 AM
Anonymous said...: I think we should tax all foreigners living abroad

And as long as we're doing Monty Python quotes: "No sir, we don't judge you morally, we just want the money."; 12/8/14, 11:03 AM
FleetUSA said...: I was a tax lawyer (NYU) and moved to London. In preparing the first year's taxes I calculated 5 different ways of computing my tax with of course 5 different answers. I picked the middle answer thinking I would avoid audit. I did.

IMO the code should be significantly simplified and more money spent on audits.; 12/8/14, 11:06 AM
Edmund said...: @Jamie Bee A US citizen residing in the US has ready access to all the US banks, mutual funds, stocks, retirement plans, etc. - why would such a person really need foreign holdings, anyway? It raises suspicion just on the face of it.

The husband of a coworker is a prominent scholar in the early Christian church (Coptics, etc.) A number of books that he wrote were translated and republished abroad, mostly in Europe. He had a bank account in the UK and in the Netherlands to deposit his royalty checks in Pounds and Euros, respectively. The sums were so small that the bank fees to deposit them in the US would erase most of the money. He left the money there and used it for spending money when he went to Europe on vacation or for scholarly meetings. He reported the money to the IRS each year as income and paid US taxes on it.; 12/8/14, 11:08 AM
JSD said...: My favorite: American company’s foreign distributorship was appropriated by cartel criminals. Mexican lawyer’s solution was to facilitate the muscle to take it back. Then sell the company off to the highest bidder. No court filings necessary, lots of closing costs reported on disposition. Now that’s lawyering at its finest. Better Call Saul.

Unfortunately, Mexico is the US’s third largest trading partner (insert joke here).; 12/8/14, 11:11 AM
Jamie Bee said...: @FleetUSA - My husband is an economist and had the same problem. He called the IRS to ask a simple question and was told by the helpline that they're not able to field questions about foreign earnings. So even THEY don't seem to know.

@Edmund - I have no doubt there are legitimate reasons why a US resident-citizen would have foreign accounts. I'm just saying those types of situations are likely fewer, and perhaps reporting that (presumably minimal?) income to the IRS was the most practical solution in his case. Plus it was technically income he earned from work he had done as part of his US-based job, so paying US taxes on that income seems reasonable.; 12/8/14, 11:21 AM
Anonymous said...: "There are plenty of people in the world who WANT to be Americans. Many of them come here, contribute to the country and want to become citizens. ..." and love to bear "the burden and cost of onerous financial reporting and tax filing requirements..." imposed on them by self-serving politicians to benefit themselves and cronies with loopholes and earmarks.; 12/8/14, 11:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Here is a good area for the next President to use the Obama Non-Enforcement Policy.

"My fellow Americans. I have talked and talked with the Congress and they have failed to act. Therefore, I am using my powers as the Executive to do away with all taxation for anyone working outside the United States for the next 4 years. No matter how much money you make. And even if you want to repatriate some of that money, I'm ordering the IRS not to tax any of it. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

To the Congress I say, don't like it? Pass a bill.

Sincerely, POTUS.; 12/8/14, 12:04 PM
Tofu King said...: @Jamie Bee A US citizen residing in the US has ready access to all the US banks, mutual funds, stocks, retirement plans, etc. - why would such a person really need foreign holdings, anyway? It raises suspicion just on the face of it.

My wife is a German citizen (but a US person according to the IRS), and has multiple bank/checking/credit accounts in Germany that remain since she lived there. She also visits yearly and needs to maintain a financial presence in Germany so that our children can become dual citizens. There is nothing suspicious about it, yet we also have to file all the account disclosure forms and pay US taxes on any earnings.; 12/8/14, 12:48 PM
Rusty said...: harrogate said...
The term "world's smallest violin" comes to mind here.

SteveR said...
because the rules are so hard to follow.

So hard? Pobrecito!

And I mean this in all sincerity; I hope to god you are never audited. And I don't mean the "show us the last three years returns ." audit. I mean the full blown "show us everything for the last ten years." audit.
You'll be a lot more sympathetic.; 12/8/14, 1:27 PM
buwaya said...: The rules, oh Harrogate, hurt all of us because they impede actual productive investments inside the US. This sort of thing makes it more difficult and risky to move manufacturing back to the US, as many are now trying to do, especially if they still have foreign operations. I am working with an aluminum foundry operation that's in the middle of this now. You don't want to know how much I despise creeps like you.; 12/8/14, 3:03 PM
Jamie Bee said...: @Tofu King - I suppose my use of the word 'suspicious' was inapt, and it was thoughtless of me to suggest that there couldn't be plenty of situations in which a US resident would want to hold one or more foreign accounts. Certainly it sounds like your wife has good reason to maintain her German accounts. We continue to maintain accounts in the US for similar reasons.

However, I don't think it's that unusual for one's country of residence to ask fairly personal financial questions as part of its tax regime. For example, we have to report US-earned income (including account interest) to our European country of residence and pay tax on it, as it counts toward our overall income for the year. The bigger issue for me - and the one that makes the US unusual in comparison with other countries - is that it monitors the foreign earnings of people who are non-residents, and who in some cases have fairly limited ties to the US.; 12/8/14, 3:47 PM
harrogate said...: "This sort of thing makes it more difficult and risky to move manufacturing back to the US, as many are now trying to do,"

Defense. Fifteen yard penalty for spreading bullshit. Still third down.; 12/8/14, 4:06 PM
n.n said...: The federal government cannot maintain trillion dollar deficits in perpetuity. Someone has to pay for the "free" stuff. Liberal fiscal policies devalue capital and labor and must be compensated through progressive tax schemes.; 12/8/14, 5:48 PM
JamesB.BKK said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 12/8/14, 8:02 PM
JamesB.BKK said...: @n.n.: Federal spending has been successfully de-linked by the powers-that-be from tax receipts through the purchase of federal debt with newly created currency units as those powers debase our currency and thereby steal our wealth - without overt taxation! - through the most reckless unhinged global monetary experiment ever.

You are correct that such deficits cannot go on forever but it is also true that it can take a long time to ruin a thing. See e.g.: Detroit; USSR. This scheme will someday crack, and it is many of us who will face penury. At that time, the powers will surely claim they've saved us from worse.

One might correctly predict that the dance will go on, until it doesn't. “How did you go bankrupt?" "Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.” (Hemingway); 12/8/14, 8:22 PM
JamesB.BKK said...: @Jamie Bee: There should be nothing even approaching suspicion or needing close monitoring if someone chooses to hold funds or other assets anywhere and in any currency in the world. The onerous reporting and annual taxation rules for foreign investments are designed to trap capital in the US without using other more clumsy means. It is a form of repression, accompanied by "take-it-or-leave-it" talk of those in government and other knaves or know-nothings. The federal income tax should just be abolished and all this mess goes away. Its creation was a mistake. Its what uncritically goes for standard fare in the land of the free though.

Taxes on "income" in any country usually don't take account of bank fees or inflation, do they? Another form of repression, and theft.

@Ann Althouse: And yet every other national government on the planet save that of Eritrea manages to allow its non-resident citizens to have foreign investments which are not subject to local tax. The issue is not what income is made to look foreign, but that the government seeks to trap capital without citizens being the wiser or better with citizens joining in in the repression - a la the NYT commenter that was so upvoted.; 12/8/14, 8:45 PM
n.n said...: JamesB.BKK:

They still have to manage liquidity through capital captures (e.g. taxation) and distribution (e.g. welfare) in order to manage the effects of asset inflation. Their redistribution schemes, whether bonds or welfare, only create an illusion of stability, and unearned reputation by the redistributors.

It blows up in their faces regularly, but it doesn't seem possible to predict where the failure will occur. It's a highly complex system, where a confluence of minor events may lead to a convergence and event. Well, that, or a conspiracy of interests capable of exerting tremendous leverage. The total wealth in America is speculated to be greater than 100 trillion dollars.

That said, it may never fail. Not completely. It may only exhibit small or large recurring events (e.g. failures) in perpetuity. That does not, however, imply the character of the nation will be conserved, or that natives will continue to control the land and government. Only that it will remain incorporated for management purposes.

Technically, a sovereign entity cannot be bankrupted. It can always create legal tender, if not actually wealth. There has to be an internal force to disrupt (e.g. limited natural resources) or external force (e.g. foreign leverage) to convert a sovereign entity.; 12/8/14, 11:03 PM
Bad Lieutenant said...: Harrogate, you can't touch buwaya puti. He is real. He is the voice of experience. He is Robocommenter. I wonder if he is one of Wretchard's homeboys come here to kick it up a notch. He is not only totally effective against your piddling arguments, he is mild and sober about it, and he keeps hitting you with facts. Dig it man, facts! Wild!

Against this you have execrable football analogies.

If you must exist and post, on the same board as this guy, H, please bring your A game.; 12/8/14, 11:21 PM
harrogate said...: Ha; 12/9/14, 8:50 AM
Pdf bangla books said...: For under-developed or developing countries, it is very essential
to have an appropriate taxation policy, if economic growth is to
be accelerated. In the absence of a suitable tax policy, the rate of
economic Tax Law is bound to be tardy. In modern times, the aim
of public finance is not merely to raise sufficient financial
resources for meeting administrative expenses, for maintenance
of law and order and to protect the country from foreign
aggression.; 12/9/14, 9:21 AM
Bad Lieutenant said...: So "Ha" = Harrogate's best argument.

I agree.; 12/9/14, 10:35 AM
JamesB.BKK said...: @n.n.: 100 trillion dollars? I wonder what that is in real money and in the absence of manipulated asset price inflation including of things built that no one really needs or wants to generate better GDP prints.

The quote was more about the pacing of going broke than any legal status (created by sovereigns I'd note). I would suggest that the more likely example of an internal force is the squandering of wealth of the people by the government to such an extent that the people go to or carve off other countries. This is actually the historical norm when governments are devoted solely to looting via the destruction of currency or outright theft of wealth - i.e., during the decline stage of empire such as where we seem to find ourselves.; 12/10/14, 3:12 AM