2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins

Status
Not open for further replies.
Il Prete Rosso said:
So let me get this straight.

As a businessman I can lose a buttload of money this year then if I don't make a lot of money next year I can use the losses of this year to not pay any federal income taxes? How can that be right? The system is really rigged.
Click to expand...

Errr... yes. Its actually quite logical and practiced globally. You want a person/business to have to pay tax even if over two years their earnings might add up to 0?

Edit: Your thinking could be biased if you're only thinking about douches like the orange one and large business, where you're inclined to want them to just be screwed. But think about a family that might own and run a convenience store or two. You don't want them to have a tax credit from a year where they had a loss?
 
MarceloFalcon said:
Errr... yes. Its actually quite logical and practiced globally. You want a person/business to have to pay tax even if over two years their earnings might add up to 0?

Edit: Your thinking could be biased if you're only thinking about douches like the orange one and large business, where you're inclined to want them to just be screwed. But think about a family that might own and run a convenience store or two. You don't want them to have a tax credit from a year where they had a loss?
Click to expand...

Over so many years????
 
Giuliani on Trump's can-do business ethic: "Trump - there was a painter! He count paint an entire apartment in one afternoon! Two Coats!"
 
Il Prete Rosso said:
Over so many years????
Click to expand...

I didn't read the NYT piece, so I don't know the Donaldness' specific details. But generally yes, the tax credit can go on for as long as need be and grow as large as need be. Maybe a business starts its years as a loss maker but the owners are willing to keep it going for a few years to try and turn a profit in the future.

I know we might all enjoy sheisty billionaires lose money, but we can't tax them as well when they do so.

I'll be honest, I despise Trump and am glad he said something so damaging by saying he's smart for not paying taxes. But I do agree on a personal level on minimizing your tax burden by any legal means. I dislike the phrase "your fair share", because you know who doesn't play fair back at you? The IRS. If you pay too much tax, they don't check your return and write back to you "hey dude, you totally mishandled your mortgage deduction when you refinanced, here's some money back".
 
MarceloFalcon said:
because you know who doesn't play fair back at you? The IRS. If you pay too much tax, they don't check your return and write back to you "hey dude, you totally mishandled your mortgage deduction when you refinanced, here's some money back"
Click to expand...

Really? Don't they? That sucks.

The Inland Revenue do exactly that here in the UK. Especially if you are employed rather than self employed. I reckon I must have had over £10,000 back over the years from repayments of tax when I wasn't expecting it. Just wake up to find a cheque in the post from the IR. Hasn't happened for a few years though, and sure as feck could do with one now. :(
 
langster said:
Really? Don't they? That sucks.

The Inland Revenue do exactly that here in the UK. Especially if you are employed rather than self employed. I reckon I must have had over £10,000 back over the years from repayments of tax when I wasn't expecting it. Just wake up to find a cheque in the post from the IR. Hasn't happened for a few years though, and sure as feck could do with one now. :(
Click to expand...

You get a return if you had too much withheld, after you file. That's straightforward and not what I'm referring to. What I meant was that the IRS isn't going to go through all your finances (information it doesn't even have) and find that there's some extra deductions you didn't claim, or a rule you were unaware of. If you have a business they're not going to review your asset depreciation schedules in your favor out of generosity... that kind of thing. So the phrase "fair share", while I understand what it means in general, is of no help when it comes to finding out how much is the least you can pay and yet not have violated a single law.
 
The tax issue is one thing, but for me there isn't enough focus on the fact that this self proclaimed genius businessman lost almost £1BILLION in a year.
 
Rado_N said:
The tax issue is one thing, but for me there isn't enough focus on the fact that this self proclaimed genius businessman lost almost £1BILLION in a year.
Click to expand...
He opened 3 casino's in the same place and they took costumers from each other. The only genius who can't make money running a casino.
 
There's been a lot of good poker facin' going on this week, first with Hillary on the Machado setup and then the NYT. I cannot believe it's only been 6 days since the debate!

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/10/2/13137604/trump-tax-return
All the Times has is three pages of Trump’s records from 1995. Everything else is informed speculation, extrapolation, and the word “could,” which appears again and again through the article.

Think about how dangerous that was for the paper. Trump could have released his tax returns and proven them wrong. Trump could have shown their speculation to be mere speculation, and used it as a cudgel to discredit their reporting on his campaign. The Times was far, far out on a limb.

But the Times bet correctly. Trump still isn’t releasing his returns. And here’s what that means: whatever is in his returns is worse than what the New York Times is telling the world is in his returns. The Trump campaign has decided it prefers the picture the Times is painting — a picture where Trump didn’t pay taxes for 18 years — to the picture Trump’s real records would paint.
Click to expand...
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
This is a genuinely sad read.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...b6f334-7f68-11e6-9070-5c4905bf40dc_story.html
Click to expand...
Like millions of others, she believed that President Obama was a Muslim. And like so many she had gotten to know online through social media, she also believed that he was likely gay, that Michelle Obama could be a man, and that the Obama children were possibly kidnapped from a family now searching for them.
Click to expand...

:lol:

Rado_N said:
The tax issue is one thing, but for me there isn't enough focus on the fact that this self proclaimed genius businessman lost almost £1BILLION in a year.
Click to expand...

Also not enough focus on the fact he has bankrupted 6 of his own business.

And that he inherited 100-200 million from his father. And that he also took so many loans from his father in the 10s of millions.

With the head start he has had, he's a failed business man.
 
Last edited:
unchanged_lineup said:
There's been a lot of good poker facin' going on this week, first with Hillary on the Machado setup and then the NYT. I cannot believe it's only been 6 days since the debate!

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/10/2/13137604/trump-tax-return
Click to expand...

:eek: Feck me, that's what you call a calculated risk, educated guess and their best bet all rolled in to one.

Also, when you look at it that way, jeeez, he must be hiding some seriously nefarious shit. Unbelievable. There isn't a day that goes by where I am not astounded by the sheer ignorance, stupidity or evilness of Trump. It's always something, and it's never ever good. I don't think he's been mentioned in one positive story at all. It's just one scandal or cock up after another.
 
I actually think Giuliani makes an unintentional very big slip here in this interview, totally apart from the fact that he does seem to say any man is better than a woman. He says, "What was the loss again, $1.8 billion, $1.9?". :lol:

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...-isnt-a-man-with-this-kind-of-economic-genius
"I want a man who’s a genius at figuring out how to take this country, that’s -- moving in the wrong direction, where we’ve had a basically jobless recovery, where we’ve had growth of less than 2 percent for two years."

Giuliani called the country's growth in the recent years "pathetic."

"Don’t you think a man who has this kind of economic genius is a lot better for the United States than a woman?" Giuliani then asked. The phrasing raised eyebrows, especially given the timing.
Click to expand...
 
langster said:
:eek: Feck me, that's what you call a calculated risk, educated guess and their best bet all rolled in to one.

Also, when you look at it that way, jeeez, he must be hiding some seriously nefarious shit. Unbelievable. There isn't a day that goes by where I am not astounded by the sheer ignorance, stupidity or evilness of Trump. It's always something, and it's never ever good. I don't think he's been mentioned in one positive story at all. It's just one scandal or cock up after another.
Click to expand...

No no, don't forget, they found ONE benefactee of his charity... Jenny McCarthy's anti-vax crew.
 
Charlie Foley said:
Hey guys! Check out @unchanged_lineup 's vocabulary mistake!
Click to expand...

:lol:

Uhh, look over here instead!!
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/03/i...-donald-trumps-tax-records-in-my-mailbox.html
My colleagues make fun of my old-fashioned devotion to my mailbox.

It’s about 30 feet from my desk — among all the other third-floor employees’ mailboxes — and I check it constantly, always hoping a tipster will have sent me some revealing letter or secret document.

In Metro, we get a lot of junk mail and are regularly flooded with correspondence from prisoners in New York’s penitentiaries.
But Friday, Sept. 23, was different.

I walked to my mailbox and spotted a manila envelope, postmarked New York, NY, with a return address of The Trump Organization. My heart skipped a beat.

I have been on the hunt for Donald J. Trump’s tax returns. Mr. Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, has broken with decades-long tradition and refused to make his returns public. I have written extensively about his finances, but like almost every other reporter, I was eager to see his actual returns.

The envelope looked legitimate. I opened it, anxiously, and was astonished.

Inside were what appeared to be pages from Mr. Trump’s 1995 tax records, containing detailed figures that revealed his tax strategies. Almost immediately, I walked over to the desk of David Barstow — a three-time Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter and my teammate in the quest for Mr. Trump’s tax returns.
Click to expand...
 
berbatrick said:
It's amazing how quickly and completely this notion of Jill being anti-vaccine has spread. I went through her public stance with ubik, it's complicated but she doesn't doubt the utility or safety of vaccines. I went through the Green Party platform just to be sure and vaccines and homeopathy aren't mentioned once.
Click to expand...

That does not matter though. I doubt racism is part of Trump's platform. Or in Hillary's case even if she is against trade pact now, does not mean she won't push it through as part of her presidency.

That slight against her is borne out of her non-answer to a direct question on vaccine and homeopathy -
I don't know if we have an "official" stance, but I can tell you my personal stance at this point. According to the most recent review of vaccination policies across the globe, mandatory vaccination that doesn't allow for medical exemptions is practically unheard of. In most countries, people trust their regulatory agencies and have very high rates of vaccination through voluntary programs. In the US, however, regulatory agencies are routinely packed with corporate lobbyists and CEOs. So the foxes are guarding the chicken coop as usual in the US. So who wouldn't be skeptical? I think dropping vaccinations rates that can and must be fixed in order to get at the vaccination issue: the widespread distrust of the medical-indsutrial complex.

Vaccines in general have made a huge contribution to public health. Reducing or eliminating devastating diseases like small pox and polio. In Canada, where I happen to have some numbers, hundreds of annual death from measles and whooping cough were eliminated after vaccines were introduced. Still, vaccines should be treated like any medical procedure--each one needs to be tested and regulated by parties that do not have a financial interest in them. In an age when industry lobbyists and CEOs are routinely appointed to key regulatory positions through the notorious revolving door, its no wonder many Americans don't trust the FDA to be an unbiased source of sound advice. A Monsanto lobbyists and CEO like Michael Taylor, former high-ranking DEA official, should not decide what food is safe for you to eat. Same goes for vaccines and pharmaceuticals. We need to take the corporate influence out of government so people will trust our health authorities, and the rest of the government for that matter. End the revolving door. Appoint qualified professionals without a financial interest in the product being regulated. Create public funding of elections to stop the buying of elections by corporations and the super-rich.

For homeopathy, just because something is untested doesn't mean it's safe. By the same token, being "tested" and "reviewed" by agencies tied to big pharma and the chemical industry is also problematic. There's a lot of snake-oil in this system. We need research and licensing boards that are protected from conflicts of interest. They should not be limited by arbitrary definitions of what is "natural" or not.
Click to expand...

People labelled Hillary as pro-Wall Street for giving similar responses to questions on wall street corruption.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.