Dear Editor,
The war in Ukraine can be stopped immediately and well if and when Ukraine gets/keeps its neutrality. It is all Russia asks for and rightly so.
There was peace between Russia and Ukraine, because this neutrality was there all the time, but then Ukraine wanted to join the EU and even NATO.
Russia could not let that pass and invaded Crimea, because Russia had a military base there – all very logical.
In the following negotiations with the West, the West said: We can talk about anything except the neutrality of Ukraine.
As a consequence, Russia amassed its troops along the boundary and because no progress was made in the negotiations, even sent its troops into Ukraine – again very logical.
Now tell me, who is to blame for this war? Two role players have to be mentioned.
First Mr. Zelenskyy. He is asking for weapons and more and more and more and more weapons. He wants this war to be continued without regard for the consequences, which are death and destruction, knowing in any case that the West will pay for the destruction.
The next role player and initiator of this war is Biden. Biden is a war president like Bush Jr. How to get to this conclusion? As soon as Biden was inaugurated he started his aggression towards Russia and China – very strange, very remarkable.
So there had to be an underlying reason for that, and the following theory and, of course, guess, came up.
In the months before his inauguration Biden bought an enormous amount of shares in the arms industry (of course, not in his own name). B. is now a multibillionaire instead of a multimillionaire he already was, and he is now also an oligarch.
Speaking about oligarchs, they all became very rich under Yeltsin, not Putin.
Putin saved Russia from this Yeltsin.
Therefore, all these seizures will be proven illegal. These oligarchs will have their day in court. They are busy to get a battery of the best lawyers in the world together and they will win if there is any sense of proper administration of justice. What a mess will that create.
The West will have to compensate the oligarchs and to pay for the destruction of Ukraine, which they have promised to do.
A last remark about the European leaders: they all follow the US president as a bunch of sheep, like in the case of Vietnam and Iraq.
P.J.E.M.
Initials used at author’s request.
Dear Editor,
According to the chairperson of CFT, Raymond Gradus, “a tax increase in St. Maarten, which is needed to generate more revenues for government, would not necessarily harm the country’s competitive position.” Gradus believes that increasing tax revenues by 2% would still have St. Maarten with a low tax to GDP ratio compared to other countries. Can we really compare St. Maarten with other countries? The other countries that Gradus refers to have vibrant economies, with excellent logistics for movement of goods. The economy of St. Maarten is not vibrant as one would think. Aside from the tourism industry, there is no other industry of significance on this island. Those that are there, directly, and/or indirectly, depend on the tourism industry.
As it stands, we already have problems collecting outstanding taxes. Would increasing of taxes not promote more tax delinquency, and/or evasion? With all due respect for the position of the CFT, I beg to disagree with the theory of Gradus. Also, is the CFT not a supervisory/advisory board that works for governments of The Netherlands, as well as of the various islands in the Caribbean under The Netherlands? If so, does Gradus and the other members receive 12.5% less of their wages as a member of a government-owned board? The national ordinance focuses on employees with high positions in the public and semi-public sectors, including members of the government-appointed boards, and members of the government-appointed supervisory boards.
My question here is, does this national ordinance apply to members of the CFT as well? Every time there is a calamity, we have no other option than to knock on the door of the government of The Netherlands for financial, and other help. If we were like those other countries that Gradus refers to, which have a higher tax to GDP ratio, we would not have to go to The Netherlands for help because we would at the very least, be somewhat self-sustainable, and more financially independent. Rather than permitting ways of hurting the island’s people even more, our government should come together with the government of The Netherlands to find ways to make the islands self-sustainable and financially independent.
Here in St. Maarten, we do not have land for economic development. Most economic industries require flat land for development of business opportunities. We do not have that. Aside from the logisticsa of land availability and importation of primary products, it would be awfully expensive for St. Maarten to ship products made on the island as we do not have a hold on this industry. Also, the ability to meet overseas market demands is not feasible, again because of lack of production space. Farming is also a big issue in St. Maarten simply because of lack of availability of land, and high energy and water costs.
We have solutions we can and should explore. The world population is growing, and land is becoming scarce everywhere. All countries complain of lack of viable farmland. Not only because of expensive operational costs, but long periods of drought and unpredictable whether as well. It is because of this reason and the population growth by 2050, that many countries are looking towards farming on water as a viable option. The practice of farming on water is for sustainable production of vegetables, fruits, and animals, but also for sustainable fish farming. I have explored these concepts as a means of self-sustainability, and financial independence for St. Maarten. Not for a private individual to own and operate, because it would not benefit the populous.
However, all who work and/or make a living from farming can participate in this program because it is intended to be a public/private co-op system. Government will provide the farms and local farmers will manage it under government supervision. The farmers will earn a percentage of the income, and government has a new source of revenue Vis a Vis imposing additional and/or increased taxes.
I have absolutely no interest in running for office. I have, however, always shown my love for the island through my various activities. In business, I have developed a product of need within the society through my funeral insurance company. For the past 27 years, my company sells only one product that offers a good package, with excellent and expedient service, and for the lowest price on the market when it comes to funeral insurance. I was challenged in court for my policy and was found to have done everything right, and therefore my company won the case. Every three years I get a certificate of integrity from the Central Bank of Curaçao and Sint Maarten, which has relevancy to my insurance company.
In sports, I introduced Pee-Wee baseball in St. Maarten in 1996. Mr. Brown and the late Mr. Baco as he was affectionally referred to, took it over after a while, which was natural, as Pee-Wee baseball precedes Little League baseball. As a member of St. Maarten tennis club, I lobbied for an international tennis tournament to remain in St. Maarten, thus bringing sports tourism to the island for eight consecutive years. It is until death do us part that I will stop dreaming up ideas to make St. Maarten better. What I would like, is to come together with government, in particular the ministers of TEATT and VROMI to further brainstorm these viable revenue-generating options for the island.
The floating farm project, if executed, must be relocated to the lagoon as the salt pond is not deep enough. However, the salt pond can be utilized partly as a Tilapia fish farm, and partly as a tourist attraction. We have a lagoon that provides tremendous financial benefit for private industries, such as the Yachting industry. I applaud the Yachting industry for it does provide work for locals. The problem here is that this industry benefits a few and government’s income is insignificant when compared to the GDP derived from this industry. I am not saying that taxes are not paid. I am saying that revenue for the coffers lacks behind in comparison. Still, I would not agree with taxing this or any other industry or individual the recommended or suggested 2%. Rather, government should capitalize on its natural resources to generate revenue from direct involvement, meaning government is the owner.
Government has recently claimed land on Airport Road. Prior to giving it to private developers, government must consider keeping it for development of projects that will benefit the country and all its people. If we can speak of government starting a financial institution to give loans to people who can barely afford a bank account, then government must consider securing available government lands, and investing in creating job opportunities, and sustainably feeding the populous, while at the same time increase its revenues free from additionally imposed taxes. I am not against a credit union concept that can provide loans to individuals that otherwise would not qualify for a loan. I believe however, that generating an income for the citizens precedes savings and loan possibilities.
With regards to the floating farms, my research showed that the cost of purchase of one floating farm is exorbitant when comparing return on investment. The only way this will work, is if there is an agreement between the Dutch government and the government of St. Maarten. This is an integral point of discussion in the meeting with the ministers. Let us come together as one and go to The Netherlands with a solid business plan, with which we will now ask for loans and/or grants that will have us become somewhat self-sustainable and financially independent. Let us inform and involve our representative in the Dutch Second Chamber, Jorien Wuite, so she can be our spokesperson, and join us in meetings with the Dutch government. Let us sow, so that our next generations can reap.
Louis Engel
Dear Editor,
As the high cost of living has become a global issue, it is now that decision-makers are tested on their ability to lead and protect the citizens of St. Maarten, as there are measures available to minimize it. One of the groups in our community that is struggling with the situation the most, with extremely limited options to an alternative solution(s) is our pensioners and our impaired persons. They are suffering more now than ever before, unlike the younger generation who are also going through the struggle but have a choice/decided, when possible, to work 2, sometimes even 3 jobs just to meet their basic needs. This is not possible for most pensioners nor is it a desired solution.
In recent years since 10-10-10 several decision-makers have campaigned successfully to move the age of retirement from 60 to 62 (in 2016) and then again due to conditions for liquidity support, the majority of members of parliament (14) voted for the pension reform, which included increasing the pension age to 65 (July 1, 2020).
https://www.thedailyherald.sx/islands/mps-approve-national-ordinance-revising-civil-servants-pensions
The goal post is constantly being moved, resulting in a longer working period and less retirement time. The pension age might change to 66 in 2023 and to 67 in 2025.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9JifTWiU60 )
To make matters worse, under the current tax legislation the monthly pension income of pensioners is subject to be taxed.
Though there are certain benefits/services available for pensioners such as transportation services provided by Helping Hands Foundation, reduction in payment of GEBE for those that qualify, services by the White and Yellow Cross Care Foundation, services by the St. Maarten’s Senior Citizens Recreational Foundation, services from the Enhance Living Foundation and medical coverage from SZV, these are clearly not enough for pensioners to survive independently financially if they have not made other investment(s). In addition, most of these benefits/services also have a fee attached.
There are those that have a spouse and still trying to make ends meet. Some pensioners are blessed to have their child(ren) to help them even though they themselves are struggling, but there are those that do not have any reliable support.
Some expenses that are significant for our pensioners to have are payment of rent, because they do not own their own home, mortgage payments if rolled over into pension years, payment of utility bills (GEBE, Internet, cable TV), paying for medicine/vitamins not covered by SZV, paying for groceries, especially those that are on special diets due to an illness/need to consume healthier products, payment of maintenance cost and the yearly road tax for private transportation. There are those that need part time and even full time assistance at their home, which also has a price tag.
To add salt to the wound, the tax department is sending a significant number of our pensioners, some with no other source of income, outstanding bills for tax assessment for as far back as 2017, to which the burden of proof lies on the pensioners, or else they would come for whatever they have left in their name.
Recently legislation has been drafted, debated, and approved by the competent authorities giving tax exemption and other luxurious benefits to people of foreign nationality (The Daily Herald, May 17, 2022, “Green light for tax laws amendments pave way for exemptions for World Bank, IGOs”). Consequently, the country will be forfeiting on much-needed funds. It was also stated in 2021 in an official public meeting and repeated on live steam that government collects approximately NAf. 3 million from pension distribution.
It is time the decision-makers in this country start working in the best interest of seniors. Measures to help relieve our seniors need to become a reality today while they are still alive, and it should reach to the point that pensioners are no longer considered to be vulnerable because of their financial shortcoming. Our decision-makers in collaboration with various companies/foundations should invest in providing our pensioners with food voucher programs/discount cards. In addition, pensioners should also be provided with a public bus pass that would allow them to travel for free in public transportation. Decision-makers should also exempt pensioners from being taxed on their AOV pension as well as raise the pension amount. If we can do it for the “haves” we definitely should do it for the “have nots”.
Richinel Brug
Dear Editor,
Let me start by saying that I have worked in the banking system for many years, and today I see certain things happening that need the attention of the authorities.
First of all, some of the local banks are applying some unexplainable “rip off” tactics to the consumers who use their bankcards to make local payments.
When a WIB Bank cardholder uses his/her bankcard at a merchant that uses an RBC bank machine for a US dollars transaction, their account at WIB is charged an additional amount on the transaction.
For example; when a WIB client makes a purchase of $100 at a merchant with an RBC machine, the account at WIB is charged $102.25 Why? Because the system multiplies the US dollars amount by 1.82 to arrive at the NAf. equivalent of NAf. 182 and then re-converts this amount back to US dollars by dividing it by 1.78 and thus the US dollars account at WIB is charged $102.25
I believe that it is the RBC Bank system that uses this “rip off” tactic, because when a WIB Bank card is used at a merchant using the WIB Bank machine, the difference does not occur. It is incorrect to convert the US dollars amount by 1.82 as this figure includes the 1% exchange tax that is collected by the bank on behalf of the government. Does the bank really transfer these revenues to the government’s coffers? I doubt it!
Republic Bank too has a similar “rip off” scam going on. When Republic Bank clients use their bankcard at any merchant for US dollars transactions, they are charged an additional 1% on the amount of their purchase. Again, I query if these funds are reaching government’s coffers. So, both citizens and government are being “ripped off” while the bank is profiting from these illegal practices.
Another concern is that a particular local bank has started closing accounts from people who live and work on the Northern (French) side of the island. These long-time clients of the bank are being told that they must own property on the Southern (Dutch) side of the island in order to maintain their account at the particular bank. Are the authorities aware of this practice?
The last concern that I will address in the letter is the bank’s buying rate for euros. At least one bank on the island buys the euros at the rate issued by the Central Bank of Curaçao and St. Maarten, but then deducts an additional 2% from the converted amount. I wonder if this is a legal practice. The rates established by the Central Bank are the rates to be applied. Are the banks allowed to add additional charges to the rates?
Government needs to ensure that the Central Bank is actively looking into the practices of the local banks. As it is, it seems that the banks are allowed to add charges to the currency rates determined by the Central Bank, they can decide on the conditions to open and maintain accounts, they can close long-existing clients’ accounts, they can apply extra charges to electronic transactions, and the list goes on, while we, the people, are being ripped off unconsciously.
Fernando Clark
Dear Editor,
There are some members of parliament who don’t have a clue of what it takes to represent the people of this country. Our taxpayer’s money is clearly being wasted on these MPs.
