The Panama Papers Have Shown Us that Nobody Can Be Trusted

By Evan Becker

Lionel Messi, arguably the best soccer player, and a person who made roughly $731,579 dollars per game for his club team in Barcelona is not a man who needs more money. Honestly, if you were to ask most people, they would be content if they made that much money in a year and considering that the median household income for an American family is $81,000 dollars per year, Lionel Messi is not short on cash compared to the rest of the world. The fact that Lionel Messi is that rich shouldn’t be surprising, he is the best player on the best team for the most popular sport in the World. For the entertainment that he brings to fans, I would say that he is adequately paid. But, On April 3^rd, 2016, Lionel Messi was named as a conspirator in the Panama Papers, indicting him on hiding his money in an offshore account in an attempt to avoid paying his taxes for what he has earned.                                                                                                             The Panama Papers is a huge collection of documents and other information being investigated by the ICIJ, an international team of journalist’s intent on showing the world the truth about all of these elected officials and other incredibly rich people who need to avoid paying taxes. This accusation is damning because not only does it show the amount of greed that Lionel Messi, it shows that he went through the time and the work, away from the game, to shield his money in an offshore company. Is Lionel Messi an evil person for what he has done? Probably not. But, being named in the Panama is not a good sign for him since now his name is connected to Vladimir Putin, Mauricio Macri and the now resigned, Prime minister of Iceland among many other corrupt government officials. Each of these people had their own reasons for setting up an offshore account, but all of these officials need to be held accountable for what they have done. The Panama Papers have given us concrete proof for the first time that worldwide leaders and businessmen are stockpiling wealth while avoiding paying their taxes. These leaders need to be punished correctly for their actions.

According to the Panama Papers, creating one of these off-shore shell companies is in fact very easy. All these people would have to do, is to visit the local office of a “little-known but powerful law firm based in Panama, Mossack Fonsenco.” At there local office, you can create your own company, must likely under the name of a family member, and instead of using that company to do things, you just deposit your wealth into it, and avoid paying your taxes. To go along with not paying taxes, nobody will even know that this company exists, so all money deposited there has no background or trace, meaning it can come from anywhere. It is for that reason that the Panama Papers is so damning because not only are these officials not paying their taxes, but we also have no idea where they got their money from. An ancient Chinese proverb says “If you want no one to know, don’t do it” which in the context of the Panama Papers means that since they didn’t want anyone to know where they got their money from, it most likely comes from somewhere bad.

The number of world leaders named in the Panama Papers is actually shocking, but it is only one piece of the pie. According to the ICIJ, Mossack Fansenco has set up over “214,488 offshore entities connected to people in more than 200 countries and territories.” This number is astronomical, since it is not cheap to set up these companies, so the fact that over 200,000 people thought it would be necessary to set up an illegal off-shore company to hide the evidence of their wealth is abhorrent. By having over 200,000 people on their roster for people who have created these companies, it is evident that this type of activity is extremely commonplace for business men and other rich people around the world.

With over 200,000 clients, that means there are over 200,000 people or companies that needed to hide the evidence of their wealth. The firm has helped everything from “Africa’s diamond trade, the international art market and other businesses that thrive on secrecy.” to “The firm has serviced enough Middle East royalty to fill a palace. It’s helped two kings, Mohammed VI of Morocco and King Salman of Saudi Arabia, take to the sea on luxury yachts.” All of these organizations are shrouded in secrecy, so it would make sense for each of these industries to be involved with these offshore companies. But, having kings and princes involved in this scam indicates that people do use these companies to hide their wealth.

 

The reaction to the release of the Panama Papers has been extremely varied from country to country. The most encouraging country to take action has been Iceland. In 2013, future Prime Minister Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson ran for Prime Minister on the platform of not being corrupt. But when he was named as an owner of an offshore company in the Panama Papers, Iceland’s citizens were less than pleased and the very next day, an estimated 10,000 citizens of Iceland rallied in Reykjavik, Iceland. The photo above shows the central downtown of Reykjavik. Edward Snowden said on Twitter that “The population of Iceland is only 330,000. Largest protest by percentage of population in history?” Following this protest, Gunnlaugsson initially denied any and all allegations against him, by saying ““I have not considered quitting because of this matter nor am I going to quit because of this matter.” But after 3 straight days of complete protest, The Prime Minister resigned in disgrace, and democracy had worked again. Clearly Iceland had a very strong and coordinated response to the allegations against its leaders, but unfortunately not every country has the kind of free flowing information that Icelandic citizens.

In China, “Family members of at least eight current or former members of China’s Politburo Standing Committee, the country’s main ruling body, have offshore companies arranged though Mossack Fonseca. They include President Xi’s brother-in-law, who set up two British Virgin Islands companies in 2009.” But, the difference between China and Iceland, is that China is not a true democracy, and in response to the corruption allegations against the leaders of China decided to censor the online discussion of the Panama Papers and “Checks by the BBC found that by the end of the day many of those posts had disappeared, with at least 481 discussions deleted from the hashtag’s Weibo topic page, and other posts shared on Wechat also deleted.” By not allowing free discussion of their people to discuss this critical issue, not only are the leaders of China insinuating their guilt, again if they had done nothing wrong, then there would be nothing to censor. So in an attempt to quell the masses, they have resorted to censoring logical discussion and not allowing the tales of their corruption to reach the ears of their own citizens.

The leaders of Russia have resorted to questioning the reporters’ credibility and the truth behind some of their actions in addition to shamelessly censoring all conversation. During a radio broadcast where Putin was questioned about the Panama Papers, he said that “They are just trying to cause confusion” By questioning the intentions of the journalists, he himself is trying to cause confusion on what to believe. Clearly, the State run news outlets of Russia are not going to question whether Putin is fit to run his country if he is connected to an offshore company. Instead, they will attack the credibility of the journalists who uncovered these documents and in doing so, they will persuade the public masses to just let this type of scandal go unaccounted for. Putin knows exactly what he is doing when he says these types of comments, and it is purely a smear attempt to distill public out cry so he can continue to stay in power.

The Panama Papers though, have yet to name any Americans, which is a large reason that they have not garnered the type of reaction and outcry that has been seen throughout the rest of the world. By not naming any prominent Americans, the ICIJ must not have uncovered their names yet, or they are withholding the information to release it at a later time where the news would have a greater impact. If the ICIJ has not released any American names by election day in November, then there must not be any names on the list worthy of note.

The Panama Papers have opened the window for the people of the world to see exactly how the wealthy retain their wealth without giving it back to the people. The 1% have stolen, racked up assets, and then hid them all in off-shore companies to avoid any government knowledge of what they have done and it is thus imperative for the people of the world to stand up to this type of corruption. It really feels like the Panama Papers have changed how everyday people view the world. This controversy is more complicated than it would appear because we don’t know where they get their money from, they could even be using their stockpiled wealth to do great things around the world. But, if you are a leader of a major country in this world, you can not afford to be corrupt because of businesses are corrupt and the government is corrupt, who do the people have to look to in times of distress? The answer is in the end it must come from the people to insist that there is a worldwide institutional change. More countries need to take the actions of Iceland and peacefully protest against their leaders so that the world can become a fairer place. The Panama Papers will end up being either the most effective avenue for change in world history, or the most depressing if nothing comes of it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In my opinion, the greatest movie of all time is Remember the Titansm nothing else quite captures the essence of Northern Virginia football, which is where im from, while also inspiring me to try my hardest through adversity. One of the most iconic scenes in the entire movie happens during the montage of training camp where Coach boone goes “Everything we gonna do is changing. We are change. We’re gonna change the way we run. We’re gonna change the way we eat. We’re gonna change the way we block. We’re gonna change the way we tackle. We’re gonna change the way we win.” This scene is so important to the rest of the movie because it shows how important change is to being the best you can be. Coach Boone’s message really resonates because if you don’t change with the times, you will become left in the dust by your competition and stuck with a losing record. While Coach Boone may have been talking about football here, this sentiment of change goes right along with the corruption of our modern government and the ineptness of the FDA. Marian Nestle talks about the lack of institutional regulation in her piece, “Resisting Food Safety,” Nestle argues that the lack of institutional control on the food industry has allowed the large food corporations to become too big to fail, to go along with their endless power in Congress. Nestle highlights the amount of lobbying that the food industry does in congress to prove her argument. Robert Kenner’s documentary, Food Inc. takes a first hand look into the world of the meat corporations in an attempt to show how evil and backwards their methods for producing food are. Blake Hurst in his Organic Illusions piece, has the dissenting point of view, that a Stanford food study proved that the conventional, modern, farming methods are not only moral, but also the healthiest way to prepare our meat. Hurst does believe though, that the government can not be trusted either way to do its job correctly. The Consumer Report, You Are What They Eat, that shines a light on the new corn feed supply used by modern meat corporations, tries its best to be non-partisan in its method, but ends up proving that the huge food corporations really do not care what they put in our food, as long as it continues to make a profit. The Washington Post took an in depth look into the food additives that are being put into our food and found that in general, the FDA doesn’t even know of the presence of newer chemicals. These articles all argue and discuss different issues and benefits of the modern food industry, but all five of these articles come to the exact same conclusion, that the US FDA is not doing enough to properly regulate what goes into our food.

 

Nestle argues throughout the article that government lobbying is the culprit behind the complete lack of control for the current food industry. Early on in her piece she writes “Food producers resist the attempts of government agencies to institute control measures, and major food industries oppose pathogen control measures by every means at their disposal. (Nestle)” This lack of control has led to a food industry that no longer has to worry about being given sanctions for contaminated food and it has created a culture of lies and deceit all in the favor of making a bigger profit margin. The biggest issue with capitalism, is that without regulation, companies will try their darn hardest to achieve the largest profit margin possible. They do not care about morality, its all in the name of making more money. Nestle later says “Attempts to give federal agencies the right to enforce food safety regulations have been blocked repeatedly by food producers and their supporters in Congress.” Nestle’s argument that the influence of big money in congress has inhibited the regulatory agencies is absolutely correct. By not separating big business and Congress, the government has allowed itself to become corrupted to the whims of the huge corporations who are dodging the rules to gain more money.

Carol Tucker Foreman, The Director of the Food Policy Institute at the Consumer Federation of America, had a very pointed opinion towards the current FDA regulations about the feed used for cows. She says “Rules protecting the feed supply aren’t as strong as they should be, and the FDA enforcement has been more wishful thinking than reality. Contaminated animal feed can result in contaminated food, putting the public health at risk.” Consumer reports in general is a mainly unbiased information piece, but their tidbits about the risk towards unregulated animal feed show the limits to our government. Plus, if it can be proven that this feed supply is significantly worse for you than old-fashioned grass, then the government could have a big scandal at their hands. It would be proven that corruption in the government is actually affecting their decision making, proving that the influence of big business has corrupted our government. Consumer reports opened their report by saying “Our investigation raises concerns that the Federal Government isn’t doing enough to protect the feed supply and that as a result, the food we eat may not be as safe as it could be.”

While Blake Hurst in general has conflicting viewpoints with the rest of these projects, the one thing that he agrees is the biggest problem in the modern food industry, is the unreliability of the government to safely regulate out food. He points this out by saying “But the question arises: How can you trust the same government to enforce organic rules or guarantee the safety of organic pesticides? Or to approve the pharmaceuticals you rely upon to cure your illnesses? (Hurst)” Hurst is very distrusting of the government, despite the fact that the government is supporting his way of farming. He statement here is contradictory to the rest of his argument since in general he is using the governmentally funded study, to prove that conventional farming is just as safe as organic farming. Hurst also uses the British government to back up his opinion by saying “The British version of the Food and Drug Administration commissioned a study in 2009 with results strikingly similar to Stanford’s. This is not surprising to most farmers, who have to deal with what is, rather than what someone might wish.” Hurst’s distrust of the American government continues since he feels like he must use the British FDA to sound credible. Ironically, Hurst is still showing that the government can’t be trusted to accurately and uninhibitedly prove that conventional farming is safe.

The most damning piece of evidence against the current regulatory system occurs in Food Inc. when the Title card shows “In 1972, the FDA conducted approximately 50,000 food safety inspections. In 2006, the FDA conducted 9,164.” This fact truly highlights how far the government has gone from trying to regulate our food. All four projects are arguing different things about the food industry, but the one theme throughout all four, is that the US government is too weak on the food industry because of the lobbying and influence of big money companies buying their way to freedom. Eric Schlessar can see that the big business has infected Congress when he says.  “These companies fight, tooth and nail, against labeling. The fast food industry fought against giving you the calorie information. They fought against telling you if there is trans-fat in your food. The meat packing industry for years prevented country-of-origin labeling. They fought not to label genetically modified foods; and now 70% of processed food in the supermarket has some genetically modified ingredient.” The food industry is on of the most powerful corporations in America because without them, the entire country could starve. This power has given them the ability to change our food to make it cheaper to produce but unhealthy to eat. No other corporation has this kind of bargaining power, so food corporations have been allowed to run amok with little to no regulation.

The FDA appears to be increasingly more corrupt as the years go by, highlighted by the Washington Post article which discusses the new chemicals being put into our food. When the FDA deputy commissioner was asked about the FDA oversight into these new chemicals, he said “We simply do not have the information to vouch for the safety of many of these chemicals” His willingness to give up this type of information is remarkable because it shows how inept the FDA is at regulating one of the fastest changing markets in the economy. By admitting that he doesn’t know what is going into our food, Michael Taylor (The commissioner), has shown us just how useless the FDA has become. The only reason the FDA exists is to keep us safe, and if they can’t do that, then there really is no point to having them exist.

Our current system needs to change if we are to adapt to the fast changing world around us. Not only do we, as a nation, need to create a divide between the big money corporations and our Congress, we also need to get rid of the corrupt culture that surrounds the US government. If, and only if, we do those things will I be able to continue to have confidence that the food I eat, will not make me sick. It is our duty as a country to change the culture of the Congress. Just like in Remember the titans, if Coach Boone hadn’t changed the way TC Williams played football, then they never would have won the state championship, our congress needs to change its ways if we want to remain as a dominant country in the world. In the end, America is a democracy where whomever gets the most votes wins, usually at least, so the only way for there to be rapid change in this country is by all of its citizens going out and actively participating in politics. But most importantly, we need to vote.

Evan Becker

 

Rough Draft of Huffington Post article.

“The way we eat has changed more in the last 50 years than in the previous 10,000. (Food Inc.)” With all of this volatile change to our food industry, one would think that the rules and regulations have adapted to go along with the changing times. But in fact, the US government has done the exact opposite by letting itself become corrupted and allowing the food industry to create hundreds of unregulated GMO’s into our food. Marian Nestle talks about the lack of institutional regulation in her piece, “Resisting Food Safety,” Nestle argues that the lack of institutional control on the food industry has allowed the large food corporations to become too big to fail, to go along with their endless power in Congress. Nestle highlights the amount of lobbying that the food industry does in congress to prove her argument. Robert Kenner’s documentary, Food Inc. takes a first hand look into the world of the meat corporations in an attempt to show how evil and backwards their methods for producing food are. Blake Hurst in his Organic Illusions piece, has the dissenting point of view, that a Stanford food study proved that the conventional, modern, farming methods are not only moral, but also the healthiest way to prepare our meat. Hurst does believe though, that the government can not be trusted either way to do its job correctly. The Consumer Report, You Are What They Eat, that shines a light on the new corn feed supply used by modern meat corporations, tries its best to be non-partisan in its method, but ends up proving that the huge food corporations really do not care what they put in our food, as long as it continues to make a profit. These articles all argue and discuss different issues and benefits of the modern food industry, but all four of these articles come to the exact same conclusion, that the US FDA is not doing enough to properly regulate what goes into our food.

 

Nestle argues throughout the article that government lobbying is the culprit behind the complete lack of control for the current food industry. Early on in her piece she writes “ Food producers resist the attempts of government agencies to institute control measures, and major food industries oppose pathogen control measures by every means at their disposal. (Nestle)” This lack of control has led to a food industry that no longer has to worry about being given sanctions for contaminated food and it has created a culture of lies and deceit all in the favor of making a bigger profit margin. The biggest issue with capitalism, is that without regulation, companies will try their darn hardest to achieve the largest profit margin possible. They do not care about morality, its all in the name of making more money. Nestle later says “Attempts to give federal agencies the right to enforce food safety regulations have been blocked repeatedly by food producers and their supporters in Congress.” Nestle’s argument that the influence of big money in congress has inhibited the regulatory agencies is absolutely correct. By not separating big business and Congress, the government has allowed itself to become corrupted to the whims of the huge corporations who are dodging the rules to gain more money.

Carol Tucker Foreman, The Director of the Food Policy Institute at the Consumer Federation of America, had a very pointed opinion towards the current FDA regulations about the feed used for cows. She says “Rules protecting the feed supply aren’t as strong as they should be, and the FDA enforcement has been more wishful thinking than reality. Contaminated animal feed can result in contaminated food, putting the public health at risk.” Consumer reports in general is a mainly unbiased information piece, but their tidbits about the risk towards unregulated animal feed show the limits to our government. Plus, if it can be proven that this feed supply is significantly worse for you than old-fashioned grass, then the government could have a big scandal at their hands. It would be proven that corruption in th egovernemnt is actually affecting their decision making, proving that the influence of big business has corrupted our government. Consumer reports opened their report by saying “Our investigation raises concerns that the Federal Government isn’t doing enough to protect the feed supply and that as a result, the food we eat may not be as safe as it could be.”

While Blake Hurst in general has conflicting viewpoints with the rest of these projects, the one thing that he agrees is the biggest problem in the modern food industry, is the unreliability of the government to safely regulate out food. He points this out by saying “But the question arises: How can you trust the same government to enforce organic rules or guarantee the safety of organic pesticides? Or to approve the pharmaceuticals you rely upon to cure your illnesses? (Hurst)” Hurst is very distrusting of the government, despite the fact that the government is supporting his way of farming. He statement here is contradictoryto the rest of his argument since in general he is using the governmentally funded study, to prove that conventional farming is just as safe as organic farming. Hurst also uses the british government to back up his opinion by saying “The British version of the Food and Drug Administration commissioned a study in 2009 with results strikingly similar to Stanford’s. This is not surprising to most farmers, who have to deal with what is, rather than what someone might wish.” Hurst’s distrust of the American government continues since he feels like he must use the British FDA to sound credible. Ironically, Hurst is still showing that the government can’t be trusted to accurately and uninhibitedly prove that conventional farming is safe.

The most damning piece of evidence against the current regulatory system occurs in Food Inc. when the Title card shows “In 1972, the FDA conducted approximately 50,000 food safety inspections. In 2006, the FDA conducted 9,164.” This fact truly highlights how far the government has gone from trying to regulate our food. All four projects are arguing different things about the food industry, but the one theme throughout all four, is that the US government is too weak on the food industry because of the lobbying and influence of big money companies buying their way to freedom. Eric Schlessar can see that the big business has infected Congress when he says.  “These companies fight, tooth and nail, against labaling. The fast food industry fought against giving you the calorie information. They fought against telling you if there is trans-fat in your food. The meat packing industry for years prevented country-of-origin labeling. They fought not to label genetically modified foods; and now 70% of processed food in the supermarket has some genetically modified ingredient.” The food industry is on of the most powerful corporations in America because without them, the entire country could starve. This power has given them the ability to change our food to make it cheaper to produce but unhealthy to eat. No other corporation has this kind of bargaining power, so food corporations have been allowed to run amok with little to no regulation.

 

Our current system needs to change if we are to adapt to the fast changing world around us. Not only do we, as a nation, need to create a divide between the big money corporations and our Congress, we also need to get rid of the corrupt culture that surrounds the US government. If, and only if, we do those things will I be able to continue to have confidence that the food I eat, will not make me sick. It is our duty as a country to change the culture of the Congress.