Jump to content
SeeMoreGlass

There Will Be Hell Toupée! (The Donald Trump Thread)

Recommended Posts

i mean, he keeps bitching about the national debt, paying his taxes would have at least put payments towards the interest of it.

he also loves this countries vets (as we all should) but paying those taxes sure would have helped them out when they get their benefits.

 

if there are loop holes and he legally avoided doing them then its whatever. but i dont see anyone being a winner with verbal support and nothing else.

 

the gov't will do whatever they want with whoever is in office.

 

 

 

 

Edited by abovetheearth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not really exploiting anything. Look at what happened. Trump claimed a nearly 1 billion dollar loss in 95. Under the tax law, anyone who lost that much money was exempt from paying income taxes for a certain amount of years. Why on Earth would you not take advantage of that? You would have to be a complete idiot. Do the Clinton's pay more in income taxes than they are legally required? Does anyone? I don't think so, so why should Donald Trump? 

 

A lot of people may not remember but the Clinton's tried their hand in real estate once. It was called the Whitewater Development Corp and it was an epic disaster. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, WAXXX said:

how's this for hypocrisy: the new york times pays nothing in corporate taxes. 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2016/01/31/new-york-times-hypocrisy-on-corporate-taxes-reaches-record-high/#f4e2df965775

this is relevant because they are owned by time warner, who owns/operates CNN, HBO (john oliver), politifact, and the washington post. all of whom constantly bash trump for trying to pay less in taxes. LOL.

its not hypocritical because the NY Times is not running for president, and is not hiding their tax returns/filings, or their ties to foreign entities.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

u all sound like the idiot in this article who cries every time someone takes advantage of legal tax breaks

https://thinkprogress.org/7-tweets-by-trump-about-taxes-that-are-very-awkward-now-75b500ea4f45#.jt5ja45dv

fact is: trump is a genieus and he is right- the tax codes that allowed him to be a brillient business man need to be changed.  we can't have anymore genieuseis.  it's bad for this country.  china is not paying taxes.  europe is not paying taxes.  she was a columbian drug lord. where are the emails thank you ~ rds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ said:

its not hypocritical because the NY Times is not running for president, and is not hiding their tax returns/filings, or their ties to foreign entities.  

yes, it's hypocritical. although you are correct that the NY times is not running for president.

 

hy·poc·ri·sy
həˈpäkrəsē/
noun
the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ said:

its not hypocritical because the NY Times is not running for president, and is not hiding their tax returns/filings, or their ties to foreign entities.  

It would be more hypocritical if the CEO or the officers in charge of the paper didn't pay personal income tax. It's a bit different but overall the same. They took advantage of tax laws to not pay income taxes. Trump did the same thing.

NYT however illegally obtained his taxes and illegally published them. Nothing wrong with that though right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ said:

they didnt illegally obtain anything.  someone mailed the tax forms to them, they reported on what they received, that is not illegal.

Publishing someone's personal taxes without their consent is very much illegal. They did it to sell papers not to be heroes. The NYT gets tens of millions in tax breaks and has even gotten millions back in refunds. They are just placing their bet on Clinton. 

4 minutes ago, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ said:

they didnt illegally obtain anything.  someone mailed the tax forms to them, they reported on what they received, that is not illegal.

Publishing someone's personal taxes without their consent is very much illegal. They did it to sell papers not to be heroes. The NYT gets tens of millions in tax breaks and has even gotten millions back in refunds. They are just placing their bet on Clinton. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay but you Trump supporters still are supporting a racist. Thus you're supporting racism. Defend that. 

Okay but you Trump supporters still are supporting a racist. Thus you're supporting racism. Defend that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, rds said:

Rac-ist

(noun)

someone who calls someone else racist

example: "If you really think about it, black people and white people who are liberals are the real racists."

 

where are the emails the ny times is a criminal newspaper thank you ~ rds

You are a bizarre person. What's wrong with you? 

21 minutes ago, rds said:

Rac-ist

(noun)

someone who calls someone else racist

example: "If you really think about it, black people and white people who are liberals are the real racists."

 

where are the emails the ny times is a criminal newspaper thank you ~ rds

You are a bizarre person. What's wrong with you? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tipyourbartender said:

Publishing someone's personal taxes without their consent is very much illegal. They did it to sell papers not to be heroes. The NYT gets tens of millions in tax breaks and has even gotten millions back in refunds. They are just placing their bet on Clinton. 

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2000/99-1687

This Supreme Court case ruling applies to this situation, and states that it would not be illegal for the NY Times to publish documents it obtained if it was not involved in the illegal act of getting them.  So whatever accountant/firm mailed in the documents was the party committing the crime, not the NY Times,  and the NY Times is allowed to print and report on the documents as protected by the 1st Amendment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ said:

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2000/99-1687

This Supreme Court case ruling applies to this situation, and states that it would not be illegal for the NY Times to publish documents it obtained if it was not involved in the illegal act of getting them.  So whatever accountant/firm mailed in the documents was the party committing the crime, not the NY Times,  and the NY Times is allowed to print and report on the documents as protected by the 1st Amendment.

This does not apply to tax returns as they are protected differently than illegally obtained phone conversations.  Let's assume the NYT tries to cite this case anyway. Are the contents of Donald Trump's taxes a matter of public concern? That is highly debatable. They'll need to prove by releasing his taxes against his will, there was a significant benefit to the public that outweighed Trump's privacy.  That may sound easy, but they will need to provide actual facts and hard evidence not speculation. 

This https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/7213 plainly states it is a felony for any person to publish someones tax returns in any manner without their consent. 

NYT isn't denying that it was illegal. Someone from the paper said a week ago they would risk jail time to publish his tax returns. 

Edited by tipyourbartender

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason the tax code allows people who lose money in investments to pay less income tax is to entice people to make investments in the first place. The government wants people investing their money in the economy, especially rich people. Trump was building hotels and casinos. Things that funneled huge amounts of cash into the local economies. No doubt he and his Corp paid less in taxes for this reason alone. It's the same reason NFL stadiums are built with taxpayer money. Bringing NFL games and other events to a city is supposed to drive up crazy amounts of tax revenue around the stadium and bring in thousands of new jobs. That's the argument at least. 

It doesn't make sense to get angry at Donald Trump for losing a billion dollars of his own money in investments that were meant to drive the economy and create jobs. These kinds of acts should be encouraged, not discouraged. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for Vinyl Collective. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×