You could take the flip side of this: a (relatively) poor schmuck like Obama when he was elected might be a lot more susceptible to things like "I'll invite you and your family to my posh estate in Florida for a prolonged 'fund-raising' visit if you'll help me get this law passed." I remember scoring this as a point in Trump's favor in 2016, that he would be immune to most of the usual forms of bribery.
Fair concern. And in response to the concern, Obama disclosed 16 complete tax returns 2000-2015. You can peruse them here, along with other former Presidents, with Trump being the exception other than one return for 2005 in the database. It shows him owing $2.3MM in tax. https://www.taxnotes.com/presidential-tax-returns
However one might judge Obama, it does not look to me like he resisted calls for transparency in his taxes and financial disclosures. Whether he might have accepted a visit to a posh estate in FLA for fund raising in exchange for political favors I could not say, but I'm sure you're speaking hypothetically.
To each his own, but to think of Trump as being immune to bribery is a little like thinking of an alcoholic as being immune to being drunk.
I'm in the grey area on his tax returns. If he was simply taking advantage of allowable deductions, probably on the advice of his preparers, there's no issue or cause for criticism. If on the other hand he was manufacturing, exaggerating or intentionally mis-applying deductions, that's another matter, and a criminal one at that. I agree with you that he should have released his returns earlier. If releasing them was a major privacy issue for him, he should not have run for President. You can't have it both ways. The fact that he fought so hard to conceal them naturally implies that he has something to hide. So in a way, he has contributed a fair amount of the drama to the leak.
Last edited by glennds on Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You could take the flip side of this: a (relatively) poor schmuck like Obama when he was elected might be a lot more susceptible to things like "I'll invite you and your family to my posh estate in Florida for a prolonged 'fund-raising' visit if you'll help me get this law passed." I remember scoring this as a point in Trump's favor in 2016, that he would be immune to most of the usual forms of bribery.
Fair concern. And in response to the concern, Obama disclosed 16 complete tax returns 2000-2015. You can peruse them here, along with other former Presidents, with Trump being the exception other than one return for 2005 in the database. It shows him owing $2.3MM in tax. https://www.taxnotes.com/presidential-tax-returns
However one might judge Obama, it does not look to me like he resisted calls for transparency in his taxes and financial disclosures. Whether he might have accepted a visit to a posh estate in FLA for fund raising in exchange for political favors I could not say, but I'm sure you're speaking hypothetically.
To each his own, but to think of Trump as being immune to bribery is a little like thinking of an alcoholic as being more immune to being drunk.
I'm in the grey area on his tax returns. If he was simply taking advantage of allowable deductions, probably on the advice of his preparers, there's no issue or cause for criticism. If on the other hand he was manufacturing, exaggerating or intentionally mis-applying deductions, that's another matter, and a criminal one at that. I agree with you that he should have released his returns earlier. If releasing them was a major privacy issue for him, he should not have run for President. You can't have it both ways. The fact that he fought so hard to conceal them naturally implies that he has something to hide. So in a way, he has contributed a fair amount of the drama to the leak.
I also feel there is a hypocrisy issue insofar as Trump tweeted a criticism in April 2012 that Obama only paid 20.5% in tax on salary of $790K, "Do as I say not as I do".
Turns out that beyond the hypocrisy of that statement in light of the leaked data on Trump's taxes, Obama's effective tax rate was lower than average that year due to $172K in charitable donations. This would be like calling someone greedy for being too charitable.
What's the saying about glass houses and throwing stones?
Last edited by glennds on Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
doodle wrote: ↑Tue Sep 29, 2020 2:44 pm
Why are so many here quick to jump on Obama/Biden/Clinton and so forgiving towards Trump? Let's look at just the facts...Trump has been an extremely controversial figure his entire career. He has been engaged in constant lawsuits, feuds, and bankruptcies throughout his career as well as multiple failed marriages and close associations with Epstein and accusations from underage girls of innapropriate behaviior. Many of his former staff have been arrested and convicted. A large number of his former executive branch appointees have come out to say he is completely incapable as a leader. His own family members have criticized his sociopathic / narcisstic behavior. He has hired friends and family to fill governmental roles and his tax returns indicate that there is definitely something complicated and strange going on with his finances. Yet, despite all of these red flags so many here defend his innocence? I just don't get it.
Well, when you put it that way...
But, but, but, he's gotten so many good policies in place they are willing to overlook all that.
I'd insert a beating head on desk gif here if I knew how.
WiseOne wrote: ↑Tue Sep 29, 2020 12:50 pm
Eh, Trump should have just released his tax return when requested in the first place. The same ridiculous feeding frenzy by the woefully uninformed would have occurred, but it would have been over and done with 4 years ago and (like Russia-gate) essentially a non-issue now.
One thing that everyone keeps forgetting: the chances are basically zero that Trump has anything to do with his tax filings other than to sign where his accountants tell him to. I can barely wrap my head around my tax return, and it's a thousand times simpler than this. What I'd like to see, for a reasonable comparison, is Jeff Bezos', Bill Gates', Elon Musk's, and Warren Buffet's tax returns. I bet virtually everything that the NY Times proclaimed in their little hit piece would apply equally well to them.
I can't help with Musk, Gates or Bezos. However in 2016 there was a skirmish that went on where Trump alleged that the massive loss carryforward that was leaked from his 1995 return was surely no different than Buffett's returns. In response, Buffett challenged Trump to release his current returns and Buffett would do so too. Trump declined and Buffett released some of the key data of his 2016 return anyway though not the actual return copy itself. He had an effective tax rate of 16%, a Federal tax bill of $1.8MM against AGI of $11.6MM. But he claimed $3.4MM in charitable deductions which drove down the effective rate. Buffett claims to have owed Federal income tax every year since 1944. It does not look like he maxes out the 50% of AGI limit on charitable deductions even though his level of philanthropy more than qualifies (depending on how it is structured).
Former Vice President Joe Biden, who often pitches himself as "Middle Class
Joe" on the campaign trail, is a multi-millionaire, according to his most
recent tax returns.
On Tuesday, Biden's presidential campaign released three years worth of tax
filings showing the Democrat frontrunner and his wife, Dr. Jill Biden,
earned more than $15.6 million since leaving the White House. The majority
of the couple's income came from a book deal - estimated to be worth $8
million - and lucrative speaking engagements.
In 2017, Biden's first year out of elective office since 1973, the couple
earned more than $11 million. This was exponentially more than the $396,552
both reported making in 2016. The following year, the couple's annual income
decreased slightly to $4. 58 million.
Biden's political standing appears to be the reason for the couple's new
found wealth. The returns show that Biden earned $9.49 million in 2017
through CelticCapri Corp., a shell company named after the couple's Secret
Service code names.
CelticCapri, which was incorporated in Delaware only days after Biden left
office, serves as the main vehicle for the former vice president's public
engagements. In 2018, Biden was paid $2.73 million through the company for
appearances and speeches all across the country. In total, over the two year
period, Biden made 49 speeches with some generating honorariums upwards of
$249,000.
Not to be outdone, Jill Biden also cashed in on her public persona. The
former second lady delivered 18 speeches between 2017 and 2018, earning on
average $36,000 per event. Giacoppa Corp., the former second lady's shell
company named after her family's original last name, reported paying her
more than $557,00 in 2017 and $506,000 in 2018 for such engagements.
Rounding out the couple's income was Biden's pension from the U.S. Senate
and the vice presidency which generated $241,00 in 2017 and more than
$190,000 in 2018. Biden also earned a six figure salary from the University
of Pennsylvania. The former vice president leads the university's Center for
Diplomacy and Global Engagement in Washington, D.C., a position that paid
more than $371,000 in 2017 and more than $405,000 in 2018.
The couple's income for both 2017 and 2018 put them squarely within the top
one one percent of economic earners, a threshold set at $480,930 by the IRS.
In fact, the former vice president's income was the largest of any of his
fellow 2020 Democrats.
Biden's ascension into the economic elite comes relatively late in life. For
the majority of his political career, Biden was one of the poorest members
of Congress. The couple's income barely edged above $300,000 until Biden's
first year in the vice president's office, when he became eligible to to
receive social security and his governmental pension.
Despite waiting so long to break into the one percent, the Bidens appear to
have comfortably transitioned into their new lifestyle. Last month, it was
disclosed the couple now resides in a 11,750 square foot Georgian-style
mansion overlooking the Potomac River in McLean, Virginia. Biden rents the
house, which once belonged to the late-Secretary of State Alexander Haig,
even though he owns two properties within driving distance in his home state
of Delaware. One of those is a recently purchased $2.7 million vacation
house on the Atlantic Ocean.
Some signs of the couple's prior lifestyle, however, appear to have remained
in tact. The Washington Post reported on Tuesday, Biden's charitable giving
has only slightly increased. According to the most recent tax returns
released, Biden gave 1.4 percent of his income to charity in 2016. The
following year, when the couple reported making 11 million, they donated
just around 9.2 percent to charity. The percentage fell significantly in
2018 to six percent, even though the couple earned more than $4.58 million.
Since signaling his intention to run for president, Biden has sought to
regain some of the working-class appeal that was exhibited in his early
career.
"I know I'm called Middle-Class Joe. It's not meant to be a compliment. It
means I'm not sophisticated. But I know what made this country what it is:
ordinary people doing extraordinary things," the former vice president said
last year.
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
Kbg wrote: ↑Tue Sep 29, 2020 11:51 amI'd be completely cool with that as long as profits were required to be fully distributed annually and personal perks were not expensible. (In reality there needs to be retained earnings but I would say they also need to be put into play within a short period of time).
I'm not understanding this part. Why can't the company keep money in the coffers? It still gets taxed when it comes out.
Personal perks are taxed as income by the recipient. They ARE company expenses.
Let me rephrase: Company expenses that in fact are nothing more than really nice personal bennies not available to the 99%.
So getting back to the central complaint from the NYT that Trump's $400 million in debt is a national security crisis....
Someone earlier in this thread asked what proportion of Trump's assets that is. Good question! If his assets are worth just $4 billion, the amount he owes is 10% of that value. I bet that's less debt than your average real estate investor, and certainly less than your average homeowner's debt burden. Also, here's a little known principle of real estate investing: LEVERAGE. When you buy properties, you may opt take out a mortgage instead of paying cash even if you could pay cash. Why? Because you want the liquidity. If you're an investor, that lets you buy more properties. Oh but look....the investor is in DEBT!!! Horrors!!
So now you can't run for high office if you're a female Catholic, if you're evangelical, or if you're a businessman carrying debt. This will be fun to keep track of. I mean geez, it's not even October and I'm already exhausted by October surprises. Beware taking this stuff too seriously.
To a point raised somewhere above, I think by doodle:
I had a choice between Hillary and Donald. Hillary told me I was trash. But I know I'm not. Donald was a nasty clown, but he was anti-war and anti-swamp and wanted sound borders and jobs. Super easy choice for me.
Another comparison between Hillary and Donald is, they are both nasty, but Donald doesn't try to hide it. But that was then, this is now. So Biden vs Trump: Trump is the same as 2016. He's the first president since Carter to have not started a war. Did you know that Obama bombed more countries than ANY other president? And he got a Nobel Peace Prize. Biden is a worn out nobody who has never had an original thought in his life. He's just the sacrificial old bull picked to lose to Trump. Except the Covid depression changed all that.
I'm no Biden fan...but at this point I'd pick any warm body over Trump...and I agree with more than half of Trump's policies. Trump is toxic however...and his vitriol will unravel our country..he is the embodiment of almost every negative human characteristic and unfit for any leadership role that requires cooperation. I'd take a dementia patient over that any day.
Vinny, just for my own curiosity... when you randomly post articles like these are you endorsing them, finding them humorous, critiquing them, prima facie, posting everything you read?
Vinny, just for my own curiosity... when you randomly post articles like these are you endorsing them, finding them humorous, critiquing them, prima facie, posting everything you read?
Enquiring minds want to know.
Mark
Related to the topic, thinking they be of interest here based upon what I've read of what others write here, and far, far, far, far from everything that I read. Just a tiny, tiny, tiny amount of what I read.
Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
vnatale wrote: ↑Sat Oct 03, 2020 6:03 pm
Related to the topic, thinking they be of interest here based upon what I've read of what others write here, and far, far, far, far from everything that I read. Just a tiny, tiny, tiny amount of what I read.
Vinny
Cool.
For the record, you have more credibility on this forum than most of the news sites. A word or two from you - along with the link - would add a lot of value.
vnatale wrote: ↑Sat Oct 03, 2020 6:03 pm
Related to the topic, thinking they be of interest here based upon what I've read of what others write here, and far, far, far, far from everything that I read. Just a tiny, tiny, tiny amount of what I read.
Vinny
Cool.
For the record, you have more credibility on this forum than most of the news sites. A word or two from you - along with the link - would add a lot of value.
I do when I have anything valuable to add. Otherwise, it's "the facts speaks for themselves". Meaning the article has it all. I'm a great detail person but a TERRIBLE summarizer.
Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
vnatale wrote: ↑Sat Oct 03, 2020 6:03 pm
Related to the topic, thinking they be of interest here based upon what I've read of what others write here, and far, far, far, far from everything that I read. Just a tiny, tiny, tiny amount of what I read.
Vinny
Cool.
For the record, you have more credibility on this forum than most of the news sites. A word or two from you - along with the link - would add a lot of value.
Yes, he's way ahead of CNN or MSNBC, and a bit below the Babylon Bee.
vnatale wrote: ↑Sat Oct 03, 2020 6:03 pm
Related to the topic, thinking they be of interest here based upon what I've read of what others write here, and far, far, far, far from everything that I read. Just a tiny, tiny, tiny amount of what I read.
Vinny
Cool.
For the record, you have more credibility on this forum than most of the news sites. A word or two from you - along with the link - would add a lot of value.
Yes, he's way ahead of CNN or MSNBC, and a bit below the Babylon Bee.
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
Your posts are the best entertainment I've seen since watching "The View" (uhh, maybe, since I've never watched The View, take my compliments with a grain of salt thrown over your left shoulder). You are right up there (actually and seriously far, far superior) with Nancy P's astute vision for Napa vineyards carefully tended by loyal citizens, and 'Gasm Newsom's latest ejaculations about reopening Kalifornia.
Tell me the truth, you wrote for Seinfeld, right? And, Cheers to you!
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
