• Earned interest on offshore accounts and investments is paid without the deduction of tax.
  
• Reduce  tax liability in  home country by transferring savings and investments to an offshore bank account.
  
• Added benefits include high levels of confidentiality, security and convenience, as well as global access.
  

 but the only benefits listed there was tax benefits with the exception of this:

Added benefits include high levels of confidentiality, security and convenience, as well as global access.  

That's when it happened. As Gingrich swung, so did Romney. "Do you tax capital gains at 15 percent or zero percent?" he asked.

"Zero," Newt answered.

"Under that plan, I'd have paid no taxes in the last two years," Romney said, and with that, despite the tepid nature of the exchange... both men went down. The affably repellent met the repellently affable, and both of them lay stretched out on the canvas.

They had both lowered their guard, you see. Newt, in trying to show himself clever, had revealed that if elected he's going to make sure that guys like Mitt Romney don't pay any taxes at all. Mitt, in trying to provoke a reaction against the idea of a guy like him paying no taxes at all, revealed that, well, he's a guy like Mitt Romney.

Dreams of My Fathers is very well written book, a very entertaining read, and full of interesting ideas.  It shows a very gifted mind.

And, the disappointment about Obama is over policy?  It seems very personal.

Fact Versus Fiction in Latest Supply-Side Debate

Capital gains tax cut in 1997 had little noticeable effect on the U.S. economy

When President Clinton proposed tax rate increases in 1993 to help close the federal budget deficit, acolytes of the supply-side theory of economics, including the Heritage Foundation itself, gravely warned of catastrophe, predicting slower growth and fewer jobs. Of course, we know now that none of that came to pass. In fact, the economy thrived under the Clinton tax code, a truly uncomfortable fact for supply siders.

If supply siders admit what almost everyone else knows, that the economy performed extremely well after President Clinton's tax hike, then it would undermine their entire worldview.

Argue all you want, moving our economy from manufacturing to service oriented, and mostly made up financial services that we don't want/need, is the reason we had out last major recession.  

Who really wants their mortgage used as some financial instrument on Wall Street.  I don't.  That whole industry is made up to make themselves loads of money, it serves no purpose to the people who actually have mortgages, if anything it hurts them.

IMO it's a bunch of lazy punks that don't want to really do anything but make a boat loads of cash by playing semantics with numbers.  And those same punks use these their ill-gotten gains to buy legislation that just so happens to make their tax rate 15%.

When the people who provide products and services the country actually wants are left paying, in many case much higher tax rates.  

It's BS, I don't want a President that thinks fortunes should be made by skinning the real contributors.  That's where all that money comes from, you and me, not some magical beast that prints money when you play semantics with numbers.  

How is that honorable?

If they had lost money on companies that failed, that would be one thing.

But Bain always made millions of dollars.  Acquire a company, load it up with loans so that Bain could take its mulit-milloion dollar fee, then leave the carcass.

It was a "heads-I-win, tails-you-lose" operation.

"The secret of a great success for which you are at a loss to account
is a crime that has never been found out, because it was properly executed."
- Honoré de Balzac

Or the more common paraphasing:

"Behind every great fortune lies a great crime."