Lllllll wrote:
It is rich when people say Hillary is so corrupt and Trump refuses to release his tax returns and has no plans to put his assets in a blind trust.
He is totally and completely unethical.
How is he unethical? If he did ANYTHING not according to law on his tax returns Obama and the IRS would be prosecuting him 24/7. So since they have not done that, he must have dotted every "i' and crossed every "t."
Vivalarepublica wrote:
Can't Stump the Trump wrote:For Donald Trump, "us" was the American people and "them" were the countries ripping us off on trade, the establishment, the Media, ISIS...
For Crooked Hillary, "us" was her campaign and "them" was the deplorable uneducated Americans who don't worship her.
Ah yes, if the world were only that black and white. You're programmed to make enemies of people that have mostly the same interests as you and want the same things out of life. And the people that use appealing language and ideas to herd you into a corner to fight against the monolithic "them" will use YOUR vote to advance THEIR own interests.
I do not expect a rich, white, privileged billionaire that has spent his entire life looking out for his own interests to all of a sudden switch gears and look out for the common man, to understand our challenges and struggles. I did not expect lifetime politician to bring revolutionary change or solve our problems. I do not expect political parties mainly concened with power and control to govern for the people, by the people. You shouldn't either.
The true revolution will come when we everyday citizens hold our leaders accountable, and do not expect a movement centered around one identity to save us. I am absolutely sure that people like you and I have much in common than you and our billionaire overlords. We should be holding them accountable, not worshiping them or demonizing our fellow working man. Expecting our leaders to save us is and always will be a losing game for most of the population, and the winners are those that herd you into a corner in order to advance their own interests.
You misunderstood entirely. For Trump, the "us" is the American people, which included Hillary supporters such as yourself. I consider you one of us. The "them" was the Establishment, the trade cheaters, ISIS, etc.
For Hillary, "us" was Hillary vs. "them" which was deplorable Trump supporters standing in her way of the Presidency she was entitled to.
Polly Plumper wrote:
the Left benefited from having approximately 4 million illegals vote for Hillary. Take those away and Trump wins in landslide.
And when you take away the illegal double and triple votes cast by a majority of Trump voters, he'd have only won about 30% of the total vote. Pathetic that this massive fraud is allowed to stand.
Tucan Play wrote:
Polly Plumper wrote:the Left benefited from having approximately 4 million illegals vote for Hillary. Take those away and Trump wins in landslide.
And when you take away the illegal double and triple votes cast by a majority of Trump voters, he'd have only won about 30% of the total vote. Pathetic that this massive fraud is allowed to stand.
And you have evidence of this "double and triple vote" casting?
SAlly V wrote:
Tucan Play wrote:And when you take away the illegal double and triple votes cast by a majority of Trump voters, he'd have only won about 30% of the total vote. Pathetic that this massive fraud is allowed to stand.
And you have evidence of this "double and triple vote" casting?
As much evidence as y'all have for the 4 million illegal votes.
I do think you do not understand there is a difference between being ethical and what is legal.
I was saying once Trump won the election he should put his assets in a blind trust. This is commonly done and there is no reason Trump cannot do it.
His companies are likely to have many contracts with the federal government.
When he said he was smart by using existing laws to get away with not paying any income taxes for years, he implied the system should have been changed so a billionaire would have to pay income taxes.
What do you think are the odds that he will change laws so a billionaire like him would not be able to game the system with carry over losses and pay income taxes?
Lllllll wrote:
I do think you do not understand there is a difference between being ethical and what is legal.
I was saying once Trump won the election he should put his assets in a blind trust. This is commonly done and there is no reason Trump cannot do it.
His companies are likely to have many contracts with the federal government.
He is the president of many companies, corporations, etc. He has a fiduciary responsibility to the stockholders, partners and other owners of entities that he runs to bring about the most profit for those entities. If he is following IRS rules, than he can never be criticized for whatever tax-avoidance measures he employs. His first responsibility is the fiduciary one.
Lllllll wrote:
When he said he was smart by using existing laws to get away with not paying any income taxes for years, he implied the system should have been changed so a billionaire would have to pay income taxes.
What do you think are the odds that he will change laws so a billionaire like him would not be able to game the system with carry over losses and pay income taxes?
Actually, the laws he used to spread his losses over many years are good laws which help anyone who is in a boom-bust type of business stay in business through the down times. If they did away with that, then many businesses would fold every time they went through a down cycle. But he was also right in that the people who donate to Hillary want those laws in place too.
It was easier for Trump to blame Hillary's cronies than it was to explain economics to the country. His political instincts are good.
Again you miss the point.
He should put his assets in a blind trust. This is not controversial.
I would put limits on carry over losses.
I am understand why the laws exist but if you lose 916 million you gambled too much and should not get away with not paying income taxes many years later.
Lllllll wrote:
I would put limits on carry over losses.
I am understand why the laws exist but if you lose 916 million you gambled too much and should not get away with not paying income taxes many years later.
Trump had a loss of 916 million on an investment of around $7 billion ( I think ), so that's not completely out of line with a big downturn in the real estate market. That's a boom-bust business, which is exactly what the carry-over laws were designed to protect.
So you are good with billionaires not paying income taxes? You think that is good tax policy?