<a href="https://archive.md/oJdtA" rel="nofollow">https://archive.md/oJdtA</a><p>(Without the third top of the page taken up by a banner.)
> one report had suggested that the amount of money held in trusts in South Dakota had grown from two billion dollars in 2007 to three hundred and sixty billion dollars today.<p>Wow. South Dakota, "offshore" money haven.
Uncovering elites... in the New Yorker? Ya I'm going to go out on a limb and say nothing will come of this but more rules for the working class and small business.
a lot of these journalists have been purchased by the elites and have their own axes to grind, so unless the amateur folks are given a framework to ferret out such information, not much will come out of this.
It's been evident for decades that people do this, so it's safe to say that the only reason they don't prosecute this is that they choose not to.
I get the feeling that this is a big nothing burger to the average citizen. They don't care. However, the light shining on this and the subsequent legal action may spur change in spite of voter apathy.<p>This has uncovered the fact that war criminals are buying houses and apartments in various communities around the US. These communities could pass their own ordinances around real estate ownership to stop this.
Man its high time we move banks into space. The global elite should have an option to park all their cash there or maybe shoot it into the sun. That way loss aversion and privacy can be handled better.
Considering how the US government has spent its trillions in the last few decades, keeping money offshore might actually be an ethical move. If buying products from a company that exploits workers in X country is unethical, why are taxes used to fund wars any different?