NPR Questions My Morality

by Bobby Casey, Managing Director

taxA few weeks ago I read an article on NPR’s blog about how the authors decided to look into the world of offshore companies and offshore asset protection. Overall, it was a decent article, but there was some misinformation.

After sending a brief email to the authors regarding their article, they immediately replied and asked if I would allow them to join us at our offshore conference in Panama – Global Escape Hatch. At the conference, we discussed asset protection, offshore banking, offshore companies, 2nd passports, investment opportunities, and more.

After giving it some careful thought, I declined, but did agree to do an interview for NPR’s radio program and their blog. From my perspective, the interview went well, but they did misrepresent some facts. Overall though, they did a pretty decent job.

If you are interested in checking out the interview, you can do so by clicking the link here ==>> They Won’t Tell You Their Names, But They’ll Help You Hide Your Money

We discussed a variety of topics, mostly about offshore companies and asset protection planning, but he did try to pin me down on some moral issues – which I found rather amusing.

His 2 main moral issues he wanted to pigeonhole me with were:

1. Offshore asset protection to avoid paying tax
2. Offshore asset protection to avoid legitimate creditors

I was intentionally careful with these questions. as I am well aware that NPR is big time national media, and a very left-wing biased one at that. So I skirted the moral issues as you can hear in the interview.

For you, my dear readers, I will address these topics, to clarify my ideas here and hopefully spark some thoughts of your own.

First of all, I think income taxation is immoral. Plain and simple. Imagine that you earn $100k per year. If the tax rate is 25% and compliance is completely voluntary, how many of you will choose to write the government a check for $25k on January 1st?

I have asked this question to Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, and Anarchists hundreds of times. Not once has anyone told me that they would voluntarily pay 25% of their hard earned income in taxes.

Taxation is theft. You only pay because there is a threat of force compelling you to pay. If you choose not to file your tax return, you are looking at jail time and confiscation of your assets.

Government is nothing more than an instrument of force that directly steals from you in the form of taxation to satisfy their own statist agendas. Keep in mind, all governments are practicing varying degrees of statism. Some are just more clever at stealing than others.

For those of you who still think government has a positive role to play in society, I urge you to study history and economics. Study Karl Marx’s teachings (read my article, “On the Path to Socialism”) and learn the vast similarities between the US political system and communism.

Read books like “Atlas Shrugged”, “A Lodging of Wayfaring Men”, “The History of Money”, “A Market for Liberty”, and others to open your mind to what is possible and how freedom really looks.

But just because I view income taxation as immoral, doesn’t mean you shouldn’t file your returns and pay your taxes. While that may seem counter-intuitive, the reality is that we live in a world where you cannot escape the state.

And since I personally enjoy freedom, not to mention that I look horrible in an orange jumpsuit, I would never advocate tax evasion of any sort; which was the direction the NPR interviewer was heading.

He was really trying to get me to tell him ways to hide money offshore to avoid taxation. Either he is crazy or he thought I was.

His second attempt at pinning me down to a morality argument was his presumption that it is immoral to hide your assets from future potential creditors.

Let’s take a look at the facts. There are over 1.2M practicing attorneys in the US with nearly 80% of all lawsuits in the world filed in the US.

In most parts of the world, conflicts are resolved one-on-one or through mediation. In the US, the default is to sue. I call this mentality, ‘wealth through litigation’. It is the same type of mindset of the people who believe the only way for them to succeed financially is by winning the lottery.

Let’s face it, Americans have become a lazy bunch. No one wants to work. Recent stats show that there are 311M American citizens, and 255M receiving some form of government money.

Public education (a Marxist ideal, btw), healthcare, retirement, and even jobs are now considered a right, not a privilege that must be worked for.

So is it really immoral to want to protect the wealth you have worked so hard to create? You risk your capital and work 16 hours per day for years to create a productive enterprise. Should you really leave your assets exposed to frivolous litigation and a court system that is designed to destroy you?

Our belief is that through pure capitalism, the world prospers. The entrepreneurs and investors of the world are the ones that invest in assets and create companies that hire workers and improve the quality of life for the masses. Productive capital needs to remain in the hands of those best suited to efficiently allocate resources.

The worst allocators of capital in the world are;

  • Governments
  • Lazy parasites who would rather sue than work

Our job at Global Wealth Protection is to help you minimize your exposure and maximize your wealth using a variety of tools. We are not altruists. Yes we believe efficient allocation of capital is the best way to improve the quality of life for people, but we also want to live in the world where freedom, privacy, and property rights are respected. This is our mission.

6 thoughts on “NPR Questions My Morality”

  1. You mention the idea of “pure capitalism” in your third to last paragraph and state you belief:
    “Our belief is that through pure capitalism, the world prospers.”
    Beliefs are not something we can argue about, and you probably can’t prove.
    But do you actually think the U.S. is a pure capitalistic system? Do you know of any pure capitalistic system? I think that assumption is at the base of your viewpoint.
    You also claim that companies are the ones improving quality of life for the masses, when companies exist to sell a product.

    1. I don’t believe the US is a capitalistic system. It hasn’t been for over 100 years. There are parts of the world where capitalism still thrives on a smaller scale; Eastern Europe, Central and South America, and Asia. You have misquoted me in the last sentence. I said entrepreneurs and investors improve society. Yes, they form companies, which create economic productivity providing more and better products and services as well as providing jobs for people. Without entrepreneurial enterprises, society would collapse.

      1. I agree with you that asset protection is important to anybody with assets or every wants to have any, but Eastern Europe, Central and South America, and Asia just do not sound like the Utopia we should strive for. One of the most convincing arguments against government provided welfare through tax dollars is that it takes away the choice the people make when they choose to give to charities. But in the parts of the world you mention private charity has failed for the most part. Once sucked into poverty it is very unlikely that an individual, let alone his descendents, will ever claw their way out. Assets or no assets, heaven forbid that you or a family member should fall ill or suffer disability during your prime asset building years. Once you reach a critical level of income insurance plans can cover short and long term illness and care, or even replace income lost to disability, but it is very disheartening to be half-way there, suffer a calamity, and know with certainly that you and your descendants to doomed to eternal poverty. Sure, you can continue to strive with what you can do, and teach your kids to never give up, but in practical terms the odds are stacked against you. Seeing people in Sweden going on with life virtually unaffected by the same circumstances that leaves one impoverished in these other nations just builds resentment among the unfortunate. In parts of the world where there is a lucky few who achieve unfathomable wealth, even compared to their Western equivalents, while a huge number, if not the majority, seem stuck in poverty that is often times not a product of their own creation, society as a whole eventually loses. It is in the interests of the well-to-do to help their neighbors suceed rather than fear future competition. Such lack of concern for the needy, and occasionally disdain for the poor, exploitation of the hungry, or abuse of the vulnerable, leads to extremist movements like communism, ethnic and religious extremism, and other causes that draw support from the struggling masses.

        Point is – either step up to the plate and make a difference among the struggling members of your society, or wait for them to vote for wealth redistribution.

  2. What of those companies making their hard earned profits on the backs of foreign workers, the environment and other species? How , if not in taxes are we going to be able to pay for the clean up efforts from disguarded waste from these companies in water and air, polluted rivers, oceans,bloodstreams . The costs are sometimes not apparent for years and by that time they have made off with the $$$$$ leaving the results for the next generation to pay. Perhaps hard earned then seems a little like profiteering.!!

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top



Privacy Policy: We hate SPAM and promise to keep your email address safe.


Enter your name and email to get immediate access to my 7-part video series where I explain all the benefits of having your own Global IRA… and this information is ABSOLUTELY FREE!