[JohnSmithee]

"Your assertion that minimizing tax burden using legal means is dishonest is absurd."

Unless I am missing the post you are responding to, it sounds like oceanview was talking about the status of these corporations in terms of nationality. After all, not every company in the world is considered an American company. At what point do these companies lose the advantages of being American companies, especially if they primarily consist of workers from other countries?

[oceanview]

yes, and also, when I say "why do we need these corporations", I mean in lieu of others in the same field. For example, why should Stanley Tools be facilitated in manufacturing tools with foreign labor, then locating in bermuda as a tax haven, while profiting in the US market, when some other tool company makes their stuff in the USA and is not gaming the tax system offshore? I say, the system should be biased to favor that corporation at the EXPENSE of Stanley, not the other way around.

[Principled]

"Your assertion that minimizing tax burden using legal means is dishonest is absurd."

Unless I am missing the post you are responding to, it sounds like oceanview was talking about the status of these corporations in terms of nationality. After all, not every company in the world is considered an American company. At what point do these companies lose the advantages of being American companies, especially if they primarily consist of workers from other countries?

Oceanview said nothing of what you post. He only used the word "dishonest" without providing his reasons. When presses, he said that meant "out of the norm".

So I am still trying to determine exacty what behaviour oceanview thinks is dishonest ("out of the norm" is not dishonest.)

The questions you raise in your post are valid, and deserve to be discussed. However, they are not the questions raised by the poster in question.