-
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Winger @canefan I agree whole heartedly with the idea of minimising tax if possible but if you can’t see that a guy with Presidential ambitions ought to hold himself to a higher level or at least that there will be a perception he should, then I despair.
Agreed.
A source of despair for me is that our institutions don't provide any truth. How can someone be allowed to manipulate in this way?
Surely this is simply a case for an objective audit by the IRS. Matter solved.There's no truth to reference anymore. Just mud slinging and blind belief in people's words and character assessments.
All the mechanisms for relying on truth in our lives are absent.
And trump exposes those failed institutions and safeguards in all ways imaginable ( as do his rivals).Truth has no part in our problems anymore
-
@Siam said in US Politics:
@canefan exactly, the bigger issue is why anyone can get away with this, (if it's true - honestly mate I don't think I can trust anything on a screen anymore 🙂)
He is very litigious, so I guess you can pay the lawyers to protect your position as long as you wish. I would have thought that the IRS would act against him if he was avoiding tax, just like anyone but even more so because he's had attention drawn to him
-
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Winger @canefan I agree whole heartedly with the idea of minimising tax if possible but if you can’t see that a guy with Presidential ambitions ought to hold himself to a higher level or at least that there will be a perception he should, then I despair.
I agree with that too. I can't believe that a man with his wealth could pay that little tax lawfully. But who knows
You agree with something different. Catogrande feels that Trump would have been more virtuous and worthy of becoming President if he had paid more income tax than legally required (to me it would disqualify the person as he or she is a fool)
And we are referring to Trumps INCOME tax. Trumps income tax may be low whereas his company may pay a much higher tax rate. There's also his companies employees payroll tax to consider. Also any GST / VAT type tax that Trump pays on his personal purchases etc.
-
@Siam said in US Politics:
@canefan that facility that allows the rich to ward off a common audit annoys me far more than trump and biden. That's the real scandal in this distraction.
Its always been this way. The rich have the power, the rules never apply the same as for the rest of us
-
@Winger said in US Politics:
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Winger @canefan I agree whole heartedly with the idea of minimising tax if possible but if you can’t see that a guy with Presidential ambitions ought to hold himself to a higher level or at least that there will be a perception he should, then I despair.
I agree with that too. I can't believe that a man with his wealth could pay that little tax lawfully. But who knows
You agree with something different. Catogrande feels that Trump would have been more virtuous and worthy of becoming President if he had paid more income tax than legally required (to me it would disqualify the person as he or she is a fool)
What I actually said was that "if you can't see that a guy with Presidential ambitions ought to hold himself to a higher level or at least that there would be a perception that he should, then I despair".
But thank you for telling me how I feel>
And we are referring to Trumps INCOME tax. Trumps income tax may be low whereas his company may pay a much higher tax rate. There's also his companies employees payroll tax to consider. Also any GST / VAT type tax that Trump pays on his personal purchases etc.>
Indeed we are talking about his Federal Income Tax. Are you suggesting that his income is so low that he only pays $750 in income tax? Or are you suggesting that this doesn't matter because his employees pay income tax and he gets charged purchase tax on all the things he buys?
-
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Siam said in US Politics:
@canefan that facility that allows the rich to ward off a common audit annoys me far more than trump and biden. That's the real scandal in this distraction.
Its always been this way. The rich have the power, the rules never apply the same as for the rest of us
Never had our faces rubbed in it as blatantly as recently though (perhaps)
-
@Siam said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Winger @canefan I agree whole heartedly with the idea of minimising tax if possible but if you can’t see that a guy with Presidential ambitions ought to hold himself to a higher level or at least that there will be a perception he should, then I despair.
Agreed.
A source of despair for me is that our institutions don't provide any truth. How can someone be allowed to manipulate in this way?
Surely this is simply a case for an objective audit by the IRS. Matter solved.There's no truth to reference anymore. Just mud slinging and blind belief in people's words and character assessments.
All the mechanisms for relying on truth in our lives are absent.
And trump exposes those failed institutions and safeguards in all ways imaginable ( as do his rivals).Truth has no part in our problems anymore
Really well said mate.
The phrase I use often is that Trump has managed to legitimise lying. Don't like something? Call it fake, with no premise. Want to garner some enthusiasm? Made some grandiose or false statements without any basis.
And when you get called out, just deflect, make a counter accusa, and move on.
I'm not naive enough to think other politicians past and present do not/have not lied. But we used to call them out and hold them to account.
We don't anymore, and that's probably as much our (and the medias) fault as it is Trumps.
Its not a good state and I don't know how we reverse it.
-
@voodoo said in US Politics:
I'm not naive enough to think other politicians past and present do not/have not lied. But we used to call them out and hold them to account.
I sense the issue now is the MSM (particularly in the US) has abandoned almost any semblance of objectivity or truth in its reporting.
An awful lot of headlines about Trump turn out to be generated by selective or deliberate mis-quoting or simply making stuff up as CNN has repeatedly done. (And no, that's not an endorsement of Trump)
Its not a good state and I don't know how we reverse it.
Until both sides of the political fence see a mutual advantage in challenging the problem, nothing much is going to change.
-
Regardless of whether you lean left or right, I think this is worth a watch (and in terms of results, I think that a big part of the lack of voters was due to Hillary being crap too, but that's beside the highly personalized and scary nature of the information reported here):
-
Here's an interesting article on this matter
Ive extracted two sections. Unsure what the truth is but unlikely to get it from the NYT
.@alexthechick discovered that the NY Times did not review all tax payments Trump made in 2016 and 2017. “Trump PAID, as in transferred to the US Treasury, $1 million in 2016 and $4.2 million in 2017. The $750 figure is an ADDITIONAL $750. Thus every single story saying he paid $750 is a lie.
Therefore, If you are offended by the NY Times hit job, ask yourself these questions:
Is it logical to blame Trump for hiring good accountants? Is it logical to blame the IRS? For the most part, they are just following and enforcing the laws created by congress. Who created our tax system? Is congress is upset about Trump’s taxes, it’s their fault. Do you think congress will ever take responsibility for the tax code?
In the end, don’t hate the player, hate the game.
-
@gt12
That was a great watch thanks.
Fascinating and scary.I wonder if the documentary would have been made and anyone would have given a shit if Hillary had won??
I also wonder if Cambridge Analytica would be such a household infamous name had Hillary or Obama used them to secure victory?? They'd probably be lauded as brilliant.Both sides try to suppress enthusiasm of certain sub-groups of voters.
It seems the Trump team did a pretty good job of it. -
I think you raise a number of interesting and probably correct questions.
I came away from it wondering whether the USA should have a law like Oz, requiring people to vote.
All I know is that if winning elections is about getting people to not vote at all, then there is something very very wrong.
-
@gt12 said in US Politics:
but that's beside the highly personalized and scary nature of the information reported here):
Why is this scary. Its just a fact of life (the democrats throw mud at Trump as a deterrent hoping some will stick. And I'm sure they have lots of data on people too). But it comes down to people not voting for Hillary due to her being poor. And maybe disappointment with Obama's 8 years.
-
The questions around tRump and taxes are not so much about the amount he pays but how the amounts he pays reveals the truth about the myth he created.
He borrows lots of money to appear rich and successful when, in reality, his net worth is a fraction of what he makes it out to be. He campaigns partly on the basis of his business acumen and success but it really just a shyster.
None of that prevents people from liking him or his policies of course, and nor should it.
However, and this is the big one, if his facade is propped up by money borrowed from foreign entities then that throws a much different lens over things. Being elected means that he doesn't have to be security vetted however this possible situation would normally stop any unelected person from holding a high position.
US Politics