George Zimmerman is aquitted and the empires strategy of Divide and Conquer continues, but in the mean time, we answer your questions about how to safely extricate yourself from the sinking ship.
Want to join in the discourse? Send your questions, comments, queries, and concerns to tdv@dollarvigilante.com, comment on a post, or get on the forums.
On to the feedback…
GETTING ASSETS OUT OF CANADA
Dear TDV,
Just wondering how one goes about getting our assets out of the country legally without being flagged by RevCan. I would like to go to Belize to retire. Any info is appreciated. We deal with Scotiabank and they 're also in Belize. Would we go through Scotia Wealth Management who manage our investment accounts to do this to move assets or some other way? Thank you so much.
B.
Jeff’s Response:
Hi B.,
Congratulations on your decision to get out of the True North, Passive Aggressive and Enslaved. I am not sure what you mean by "flagged" by the Kanadian version of the IRS. You are still able to transfer funds and assets fairly freely to wherever you would like. Unless you mean that you "owe" money to Revenue Canada on any capital gains made on a sale of property or whatnot and you don't wish to pay that… in that case, there is very little I can tell you other than it is risky to try to flout these oppressive tax regimes and you'll have to deal with the consequences of your actions whatever they may be.
As a Kanadian, if you do leave the country and have official residency in another country, then you no longer are obliged to pay taxes in Kanada and just have to pay taxes in whichever country you do reside (in this case, Belize). Depending on what kind of income you have and the tax rates that apply in Belize you could consider becoming an actual resident of another country that has no taxes that are applicable to your income (Paraguay is quite good for this as are countless other countries – for advice, contact TDV Passports for info on residencies and passports worldwide including a new passport just announced this week, in Cyprus). And then live in Belize as a tourist… of course, this has other issues as it will be harder for you to do things in Belize as a tourist (renting a place, getting utilities, mobile phone etc).
These are all decisions you'll have to make and these are many of the topics we regularly talk about at The Dollar Vigilante paid newsletter (less than $15/month).
In fact, in the next few weeks we will be interviewing a bank in Belize that is one of the only banks we know of outside of the US who readily accept American clients and we'll have info on how to open an account there all via Fedex. That bank, by the way, has about half Kanadians and half Amerikans as their clients and we know them personally. I met with them personally at the last Global Escape Hatch conference in San Pedro, Belize (the next conference is at Bocas del Toro in Panama this September).
In the end, it is very hard to get good advice on the kind of info you are looking for. Even at Scotia Wealth Management I'd be willing to bet that few there actually have experience in internationalizing assets and the tax and regulatory implications of it. That's because most financial and wealth advisors in the Western world today are all government regulated and never taught how to do those kinds of things. That's also partly what we are here for. To give you info and advice on these topics and to also connect you with people worldwide who have already done what you want to do. TDV Groups (which you can access through a basic subscription to TDV) has expats in dozens of countries who are happy to help you with any advice and info. We currently do not have one in Belize, however, so if any TDVers have expatriated to Belize and would like to help others and meet interesting people, please contact us at tdv@dollarvigilante.com.
Or, if you do move there, B., consider starting a group in your locale and helping others with your experiences.
OBAMA’S AMERICA
Hey Jeff and Gary
While analyzing the public's absolute consent or/and indifference to all the atrocities of Obama (in Europe it's even worse, lots of people think he's god's gift to humanity), what I mean is he can target whistleblowers more than all other presidents combined, he would send drones, and spend more money in wars than all the presidents before him combined, extend the militarization of the police…etc, the list is long. […] Every single day you find something absolutely INSANE in the news; kids expelled because their pancakes are shaped like a gun, grown up men, drawing their weapons on a girl 'cause they thought she had beer! Every single day and everybody is just chillin', no biggie, it's cool, you know!
Now, on the other hand, if he were to cheat on his wife, or get a blow job from his secretary, people would be talking about this for years! Everybody would be horrified!
But try to talk about drones for example, and the conversation is pretty much over. "Leave me alone, man! 'The Walking Dead' is about to start!" Zombies watching zombies, can't make that stuff up!
The question is given the fact that they he can get away with anything, is it possible that he just leaks out that he wasn't born in the US soil, so he gets an excuse to amend the constitution, to make it possible for people who weren't born in the land of the free to be presidents, and that would be his Trojan horse so to speak, because once you amend the constitution everything is for up for grabs! Or do you think that he would just continue removing rights slowly and in a 'in your face' mode (the abuse syndrome)?
Thanks for the good work!
Adil.
Gary's Response:
First of all, "The Walking Dead" is a great show. If it were about to come on, I'd probably stop ranting, myself.
Second, while I agree with everything you've said, I don't see why we should get upset if the president were not US-born. Does it matter if your commie/fascist/socialist dictator is homegrown or not? The requirement for US birth of a US president is like the requirement that the local maffia capo be full-blooded Sicilian. Do you think commie/fascist/socialist tendencies somehow increase with non-US birth…and that installing a foreign-born commie/fascist/socialist president would somehow accelerate the slide into the total state?
I certainly don't. Obama may be the most frighteningly fascist president we've ever had… but I honestly think his non-full whiteness and possible foreign birth (though it's also possible he was grown in an artificial gestation chamber) has merely allowed him to sell his slick brand of fascism better than a fumbling honkey like George Bush ever could have. I don't think Obama is inherently more evil than a Bush, Clinton, Roosevelt or Lincoln — they're all about the same — but his biracial, facile charm is what helps the evil go down the throats of the sheeple smoothly. No matter what evil Obama commits, any criticism is passed off as churlish racism. We've often joked here at the virtual TDV office that Obama could stomp a kitten to death on live TV and his supporters all over the world would say, "I love Obama and what he is doing, though I take exception to his kitten-stomping stance."
But I hear what you're saying. They're just removing one rule after another. But the rules never mattered in the first place. In the end the state does what it wants. The rules about who can be part of the criminal (political) class just seem to matter the least.
A PUBLIC GOOD?
Gary,
So you do admit that government is really good at things like defense. Which is a "public" good an unlikely to be provided in the required quantity by the free market.
War and defense are two sides of the same coin. You have to be good at one to be good at the other. When I was in the military we said our job was to kill people and break things. And we were very good at that (still are). Private defense wouldn't do the same. Imagine trying to buy and aircraft carrier through private armies.
–Matt A.
Gary's Response:
It's amazing to me how mass murder and destruction somehow have been conflated with "defense" in this question. That's like saying courtship should involve beatings and rape. They are not the same thing. It doesn't matter if you say that defense means breaking lots of things and killing lots of people.
So no, private defense would not involve the very expensive armature of a standing industrial state army, which is designed to invade, destroy and occupy. Private defense would probably involve a lot of deterring and other tactics that kept costs low because the private sector has to be cost-conscious because it can't take money from its customers at gunpoint like the government can.
Standing armies and aircraft carriers are horribly expensive ways to start fights and create new enemies. What we want is affordable defense, not an expensive imperial armada. Defending a region (I hesistate to say "nation" since I don't buy into collectivist state identities) could be as simple as buying insurance with a company who contracts out the deterrance to a defense company with a nuke or two. It's no accident that countries with nukes have never been invaded, by the way. Nukes are incredibly effective deterrents.
Not to say that that would for sure be the answer to regional defense. The market is smarter than one man and if we let it do its thing, it will come up with results that neither you or I have thought of. What is clear is that the state's means of defense is horribly wasteful and too easily put to destructive ends. Standing state armies as a means of defense are the equivalent of trying to prevent mosquito bites with a pistol.
