And you may have missed it but I repeated at COVID's peak that it was only affecting 0.05% of the population . I was against universal vaccination. My cry was then and still is more clarity on who were these 0.05% and why.

It is a mystery.

But just because the a doctor works in both places, it doesnt mean that doctor will treat you or that they will give you the respect they give a client at the more prestigious hospital. We're all human and subject to biases.

You also have a greater risk of being exposed to treatment by an unsupervised intern. I recall a personal experience with a family member being giving a diagnosis by a doctor at that hospital, when I relayed the information to an individual with knowledge their response was *that's complete nonsense*. It turns out the doctor had no clue of the correct diagnosis that simply required a course of antibiotics but was deadly if untreated. They treated the symptoms but did no analysis to understand, and literally had no knowledge of the cause. When told the cause they said "*that's not it*". And they spoke with authority, that's where the danger is. Me and you with no medical training dont know the difference

The problem is PMH has too many lay people being exposed to bad advice with no expert supervision. I was told years ago that if babies were dying at the rate that adults were, alarm bells would be going off but when an adult dies, especially someone over 60 we tend to say *it was their time*, we dont question/examine if anything unusual happened with the treatment

And I was told by another prominent physician at the prestigious hospital, "*dont trust everybody in a white coat, here or abroad*"

Ok so I agree with you, I dont believe COVID bites either but from what I understand, while you and I walk around carrying COVID unawares because the threat to the population at large is clearly over (for now at least), there are categories of people for which COVID is **extremely** deadly, like delta variant when it first showed up deadly, one such category being pregnant women. (I still say we need more data on how this affects Bahsmians)

I dont believe pregnant women are under the same leveff l of threat from the seasonal flu. That being said, **if** this was COVID, it is a **public* health matter therefore not a secret or a natiomal security issue to be hidden to protect the country's tourism goose, the public should be informed in clear terms, not an abstract "*we had a number of people with "non communicable diseases" flood A&E*"

She was in an *isolation* ward, did she have COVID? Is the min. Of Health giving us a true picture of what is happening? Was the recent 40 person insurgence at pmh covid related? If it was and they said nothing they've completely failed us. Their job is not to cover up for good tourism numbers. Its "public" health. I'm going to bet the solution they come up with is no patient can go in with a cellphone

Which is odd because everyone was so affronted when the world pointed out our history of corruption. Joe Leader an ting

RBC doesnt fit the criteria. RBC is not a Bahamian company. We have no "right" to tax revenue as such. This law targets companies that have their headquarters in foreign domains so they can skip taxes in their home country. RBC is headquartered in Canada, Canada has no reason to say RBC is avoiding paying taxes

One of the things Ive seen since COVID is alot of people with no background in technolog jumping into the space, creating window dressing and proudly pronouncing that *we are now digital*. ClickToClear is a prime example, it was literally heralded with "*theyll have to change the way they work to fit the system*". This is digitilization sacrilege. Now they're forcing brokers to purchase another system to fix the first sysyem

**This is actually comparing apples and oranges, the "offshore" sector is well regulated by the Central Bank, CB had no oversight of FTX. Which is puzzling**. CB has since published a paper pointed to all the **gaps** in the DARE Act and confirming that they will step in now to fill thrm, specifically providing oversight of the Risk Management framework

Not sure if you get the spirit of the treaty. You mention it *might open the door to corporate tax*, this IS a corporate tax. There are some other elements being mixed up as well...

This is a GLOBAL treaty that we've **already** signed on to. It might be a stretch to believe that countries sign the treaty then create local laws to negate the treaty, is such a thing even possible? If it were possible, what black blue gray red list would we appear on next?

Also the objective is actually the **reverse** of what you suggest. I have no idea if RBC meets 750million in revenue threshold, if they do, it is **Canada** who would say even though you send "profits" back, you're not paying all of the taxes you should because you're in the Bahamas.

In addition RBC is **headquartered in Toronto**, so they're not hiding their headquarters in what could be considered a tax haven while making profits off of Canadians. They're physically here because they're physically offering a service. I dont think this treaty targets them.

The law is really meant to stop the bleeding of tax revenue lost to digital giants

I still have questions but I "believe" the intent is if the digital giant makes money selling to a Bahamain, the Bahamian govt would get a share of the 15% tax through some revenue sharing algorithm. Not sure....

"*newly released analysis notes the proposed global minimum tax – which The Bahamas, along with 136 other jurisdictions, has agreed to implement – is now expected to result in annual global revenue gains of around $220 billion, up from the OECD’s previous estimate of $150 billion*" nassau guardian

So wherever your company is headquartered in the world, you will be subject to a minimum tax of 15% and those tax dollars will be sent back to your home country. This applies to companies making 750 million euros.

I wonder how this pans out. Does it currently affect us at all? Seems like a grab at the digital giants like google and Amazon. They mention that developing countries will gain the most in proportion to existing revenues, but that sounds like fancy talk, for you een making much now anyway so whatever we give you will seem like alot.

If companies are registered here because we're a low tax jurisdiction but this new law says they get taxed anyway what percentage of those companies will see no benefit in registering here after 2024 implementation? And if they leave our share of 15% minimum will be exactly $0 dollars no matter the fancy estimates. I hope someone did the analysis and we didnt just sign because THEY said it would be goestimates. But... we need to move from 100% dependency on taxes anyway.. not sure how we make the leap, not because we cant, but because we typically elect presentation over substance, they then do their darndest to block substance from moving forward and supplanting them, stiffling innovation