On 21 Aug 2012 19:54:34 GMT, Han wrote:

Tim Daneliuk wrote in news:5033DAE5.5040404
:

On 08/21/2012 10:01 AM, Han wrote:
So that's where you can get a 370 fold (37,000%) yield?

It's entirely possible, legal, and ethical.


Romney has large amounts of capital off-shore. Theoretically that
money could be in use to support the US economy. Is it?

So what? It is HIS money and where he chooses to keep it is HIS
business.
Great job creators always look out for themselves first.

I'm not sure I know what that means. EVERYONE (who is sane) looks
out for themselves and the ones they love first. The virtue of
capitalism is that, in doing so, they incidentally create opportunity
for others.

That's a feel good statement if I ever saw one. I hope it is a
consideration for every capitalist, see whether what they do is creating
opportunity for others. Have you asked Steve Gass what opportunities he
is creating?

What's "feel-good" about incidentals?


In other words, if this is legal, is it right?


Nothing you've suggested even rises slightly to any level of being
unethical.
That's your opinion. I disagree.


Please cite a single demonstrable example of something being unethical.
You cannot. You may not *like* what he's done, but it's HIS money
and therefore, no one else's business.

Didn't I say that I find it less than "right" that Mitt stores his money
in offshore tax havens?

How many richies do you know who keep -all- their money in US-only
banks/investments? Most don't because interest is higher elsewhere,
not to mention lower or no taxes elsewhere.

--
And the day came when the risk to remain tight in a bud
was more painful than the risk it took to blossom.
-- Anaïs Nin