1st presidential debate 2016

[Keith&Co.]

"We" do, do we? I suppose so... where "we" = you.
I don't game as much as I can, by a long shot.

You don't try to pay as little tax as possible? You don't take every deduction and credit you're eligible for?

Really?

I don't, either. We take some credits, but we don't hire someone to suss out every single penny we can save on our taxes. We're easily satisfied as long as money comes back at the end of the math.

I know we don't itemize our charity donations.

 

[Angry Floof]

Wasn't there a southpark video posted in this thread earlier?

 

[Harry Bosch]

"We" do, do we? I suppose so... where "we" = you.
I don't game as much as I can, by a long shot.

You don't try to pay as little tax as possible? You don't take every deduction and credit you're eligible for?

Really?

Trump takes credit's that he's not entitled to. He funnels cash flow from his non-profit to avoid legally paying taxes on it.

 

[fast]

I still don't give a fuck. And I don't think anyone really does. Are those bitching about this planning to look at them? Have they ever looked at any candidate's returns? Have the looked at Clinton's?

You don't care about whether a guy who claims the infrastructure is crumbling and he can fix it is paying taxes?

Eh, no.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

You don't care about whether a guy who claims the infrastructure is crumbling and he can fix it is paying taxes?

Eh, no.

You don't care if the guy isn't paying taxes to support the fucking infrastructure he says is crumbling? You know what that would be called? Massive hypocrisy.

 

[fast]

Eh, no.

You don't care if the guy isn't paying taxes to support the fucking infrastructure he says is crumbling? You know what that would be called? Massive hypocrisy.

I don't see it.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

You don't care if the guy isn't paying taxes to support the fucking infrastructure he says is crumbling? You know what that would be called? Massive hypocrisy.

I don't see it.

Maybe you read too fast.

 

[none]

even if it isn't hypocrisy it don't look good for him

 

[Jayjay]

It's one thing for a random tax payer to take advantage of legal tax loopholes. It's not his fault the loopholes are there, it's the legislators who fucked it up. On the other hand, for the politicians who make those rules to benefit there is a moral dimension, because they have an incentive to continue to use the loopholes and even expand them. That's why the blind trusts, though they are often not so blind after all.

As for his tax returns, Trump's explanation that he can't do it because of an audit is silly. IRS says there is no problem, and even Trump is saying that he would do it if Hillary releases some emails. If there really was no way for him to release the tax returns, why would anything that Hillary does somehow affect it? All that's there is that he doesn't want to. And if his lawyers are "advicing against it" that just raises the question, what the hell is there that might pose legal problems?

 

[Shadowy Man]

It's one thing for a random tax payer to take advantage of legal tax loopholes. It's not his fault the loopholes are there, it's the legislators who fucked it up. On the other hand, for the politicians who make those rules to benefit there is a moral dimension, because they have an incentive to continue to use the loopholes and even expand them. That's why the blind trusts, though they are often not so blind after all.

It always comes across a little disingenuous when rich people say they're simply following the laws when they take advantage of the tax loopholes to reduce their tax burden. I wonder who lobbied the politicians to write those laws that way?

It's easy to say you're just following the rules when you get to write the rules.

 

[Elixir]

You don't try to pay as little tax as possible? You don't take every deduction and credit you're eligible for?

Really?

I don't, either. We take some credits, but we don't hire someone to suss out every single penny we can save on our taxes. We're easily satisfied as long as money comes back at the end of the math.

I know we don't itemize our charity donations.

Yup, very much like that. My situation might not be too typical; I am sure I could reduce my tax burden by some thousands by spending some thousands with lawyers. I'd just as soon pay for some of the services that the gov provides that I actually use (and reduce the burden on everyone else by that much) rather than pay almost all of it straight into lawyers' pockets. (That's called a sense of ethical responsibility, JonA.)
The difference is, that if I was making ten times what I am making, the lawyer bill might double, but the savings would go 10x or more. The really good tax loopholes are designed for people with incomes of 7+ digits. There is no relief for small business owners declaring 6-digit incomes.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

"We" do, do we? I suppose so... where "we" = you.
I don't game as much as I can, by a long shot.

You don't try to pay as little tax as possible? You don't take every deduction and credit you're eligible for?

Really?

You simultaneously agree the infrastructure is crumbling and it needs to be fixed, and you do not want to pay taxes to support said infrastructure? Really?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

You simultaneously agree the infrastructure is crumbling and it needs to be fixed, and you do not want to pay taxes to support said infrastructure? Really?

Well, that is the typical Republican position. They want to be able to take advantage of everything, but want other people to carry the burden of providing those things. Self-sufficiency is only something to be demanded of others.

 

[fromderinside]

Mint the coin. Mint the coin. Mint the coin.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Next debate is on October the 9th. VP debate on October the 4th. Are you ready for more?

 

[Shadowy Man]

VP debate on October the 4th.

Might want to pay attention here since Pence will be doing all the substantive President-ing.

 

[JonA]

You don't try to pay as little tax as possible? You don't take every deduction and credit you're eligible for?

Really?

You simultaneously agree the infrastructure is crumbling and it needs to be fixed, and you do not want to pay taxes to support said infrastructure? Really?

When did I say anything about infrastructure?

 

[Elixir]

You simultaneously agree the infrastructure is crumbling and it needs to be fixed, and you do not want to pay taxes to support said infrastructure? Really?

When did I say anything about infrastructure?

Your use of the internet is a tacit admission of your use of "infrastructure".

 

[credoconsolans]

It's one thing for a random tax payer to take advantage of legal tax loopholes. It's not his fault the loopholes are there, it's the legislators who fucked it up. On the other hand, for the politicians who make those rules to benefit there is a moral dimension, because they have an incentive to continue to use the loopholes and even expand them. That's why the blind trusts, though they are often not so blind after all.

It always comes across a little disingenuous when rich people say they're simply following the laws when they take advantage of the tax loopholes to reduce their tax burden. I wonder who lobbied the politicians to write those laws that way?

It's easy to say you're just following the rules when you get to write the rules.

Bingo.

 

[fast]

even if it isn't hypocrisy it don't look good for him

Which part? Being smart or bragging about it?