Is Huffington Post considered "mainstream" now? I always considered then in the same vein as DailyKos. Essentially bloggers with a liberal bias. Brad Austin- What media do you consume?
Let's take an easy, unprepared example. I read your question and opened up Google News. Since most of the country uses google daily, I'd say their reach is highly influential. There were 6 stories in the "Top Stories" section at start of feed... 1) NY AG orders Trump Foundation to cease fundraising - CNN - 2 more links on the same topic from Huff Post and Wash Post - "in-depth" section linking "The many scandals of Donald Trump, a cheat sheet" 2) What Options Are Left In Syria? - NBCNews 3) The Latest: Trump's Leaked Taxes not from Connecticut - Wash Post 4) Deadly Hurricane Matthew to Dump 40 Inches on Haiti - USA Today 5) Bass Pro Shops is Buying Cabela's for $5.5 billion - Business Insider 6) Donald Trump: Military Suicides happen to servicemembers who 'can't handle it' - CNN 3 of the 6 top stories everyone sees when they open the feed were discussing Trump in a negative light...CNN, Huff Post, Wash Post were the sources. Trump Foundation, Trump taxes, and an angle of why military people should dislike Trump. Assange has a big Wikileaks dump tomorrow targeting HRC that's trending all over non-left sites, nothing shown anywhere on whole news feed. Clinton called Bernie supporters "living in parent's basement" is trending, and she now canceled her speaking tour with BS. Nowhere on news feed. I'm just saying I had to refrain from Google and Yahoo news, which are the two popular search engine starting places upon opening a web browser. On both news sites (which links to stories on other sites) it's always the first screen bashing Trump in half the stories and rarely anything negative on HRC no matter what issues are going on. If one thinks HRC doesn't constantly cause ammunition to bash on like they do Trump everyday...gimme a break.
Just FYI, the NY AG cease and desist is complete political drivel. The Foundation has been around since the late 80s I believe, and now there's a cease and desist letter? Riigghhtt. Trump is under no obligation to donate money to a foundation he runs, and there is nothing illegal about a foundation making grants to charities as part of those charities' fundraising auctions. NOTHING. Do not believe what the media is telling you. Apparently, Obama's (the guy Trump said wasn't born in the United States) own IRS (the same IRS targeting conservative organizations) fined the Trump Foundation - wait for it - $2,500 for a "contribution" to that media PAC in Florida supporting that AG. Me thinks that if there was something really going on, the IRS would have kicked down the door and put everyone in jail. And Hillary going on about this nearly $1B loss allows him to avoid taxes. If you have a net worth of $10B (note that's net...assets will be much higher), losing $1B isn't unusual, especially if you're in the real estate industry. Billionaires lose billions of net worth in a matter of weeks depending on their portfolio. And tax loss carry forwards are the law. If you have a realized capital gains loss, every single person in the planet should, and according to tax law may have to, record those carry forwards. HOW STUPID WOULD YOU BE NOT TO? The guy has investors and employees that depend on him. And the net loss may not even be a cash loss. There's a good chance a lot of that loss was due to accelerated depreciation of a whole bunch of new casinos. This is the reason he didn't release his taxes, because mainstream media morons all of a sudden become expert CPAs on (un)realized gains/losses cashflow and the tax code and manipulate the national dialogue (I'll say it...outright lie) to help their ordained liberal candidate. Their ordained liberal candidate who accepts money from Saudi Arabia while claiming to be a champion of women and the gay community, the candidate who whines about Trumps taxes (where there is no legal requirement to disclose) but destroyed thousands of emails that contained classified material, the candidate who claims to want to bring the country together yet calls millions of Americans deplorables. I really don't know who I hate the most...Hillary, Trump or the Media. It's a close call.
His company is still around and growing when a lot of other real estate companies in the early 90s that also took losses are now defunct. Does this mean every individual and company who used net loss carry forwards are un-American? And there's a reason why loss carry forwards are in the code. You want to bury companies and discourage innovation? Well...let's force companies to pay taxes when they're underwater. BRILLIANT!!!!! And last time I checked, the majority of those who actually don't pay income taxes vote Democrat. Clinton and NY Times use NOL carry forwards also...shocking!!!!!!! http://www.americanthinker.com/blog...ary_clinton_both_used_the_same_provision.html
First the Democrats complain about companies making a profit without recognizing the risk of running a business. Then, when the risk of running a business is agonizingly exhibited in the form of losses or bankruptcy, Democrats complain about the losses and bankruptcy.
Thanks for the response. I don't typically use either of those news sources. Googles' "personalization" scares the hell out of me. I'd rather limit how much of my data I give to them. With all that said, when I went to Googlenews.com the top suggested for you news item was HRC and BS cancelling their joint events.
Most people only focused in on the "deplorables" insult, but what I found even more concerning was saying some of them are "irredeemable"... “You know, just to be grossly generalist, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic — you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people – now have 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive, hateful, mean-spirited rhetoric. Now some of these folks, they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America." A person running to be the leader of the entire American public said a sizable number of Americans by definition are 'not able to be saved, improved, or corrected'. So basically she is only going to serve and represent citizens she deems as real Americans? Trump's campaign would be over if he'd said anything that polarizing and disparaging about millions of American citizens.
Wow, that is scary as it appears Google has a fix on what to topics to show specific users off of their reading history. I know it freaks me out when I go browse websites for a certain product and leave without logging in anywhere. Then I go to my Yahoo email and emails pop up advertising the same line of products I just browsed at an unrelated web store.
Trump HAS disparaged millions of Americans and per the polls he's still in a dead heat race so clearly your last point isn't bolstered by the facts.
Can we all admit that the $10B figure is bogus? No independent study has put his net worth above $4.5B. Even Trump has admitted that $3B of his quoted figure is the value of the "Trump" name. Nearly every middle-class American knows what it's like to pay Federal income tax. We see it coming out of our paychecks and most of us don't GET it all back. If a Billionaire can get away with paying nothing in federal income tax it demonstrates how skewed our tax system is. As Warren Buffet noted, he shouldn't have an effective tax rate less than his administrative assistant. Why does it matter how much Trump has paid in taxes? It puts his tax policies and economic plans in context. It demonstrates his own hypocrisy of being for the working class person but ensuring he's treated differently. As the latest CNN Poll shows, paying taxes is considered a civic duty (86%). How else to pay for our military, social programs and a host of other things that American's say they care about? One poster (Phil Ellis?) on this board pushed the idea that only tax payers should be able to vote. So, if Donald Trump hasn't paid any taxes shouldn't that matter? Honestly, Trump can't release his taxes at this point. If he does he guarantees a loss in the polls. He most assuredly has paid other taxes (if no federal income tax) and his campaign better be putting together a briefing on how much property, sales and other taxes he's paid.
Is it your expectation that he and his business pay taxes not owed? The tax advantages he employed, carrying forward losses, is available to every single American. Not everyone is in a financial position to do so, but it does not discriminate. Trump openly advocates for revision of the tax code. HRC simply wants a more complicated tax system. Finally, did HRC and Willy take deductions, recognize gains and losses and deduct the $1 million they donated to themselves? We shall wait on you to give us the standard liberal hypocritical answer.
Husker, what do you think would happen if individuals, families, small businesses, and large companies couldn't carry forward a loss? Please, enlighten us. And he's not "getting away" with paying taxes. He didn't owe taxes. You don't owe taxes when you have a loss. Additionally if you had a loss of ($1M) in year 1 and a net income of $300k in year 2, you're not $300k wealthier. You're still underwater by ($700k). If you're a middle class family that owns a home or you have retirement/investment account...you can do the same thing. You also make the tired liberal false analogy between taxes coming out of your paycheck and capital gains income on investments (capital reinvested into the economy) which is much riskier.
I'll put his tax policies and economic plan in context for you: You can be for the working class and be an advocate for lower taxes. In fact, I believe that is a requirement. This country was not founded on the idea that federal taxes were necessary. It was founded because there was too much taxation by a corrupt, overreaching "government". Trump cannot "ensure" he is treated differently. Only the IRS and its 14,000 pages of rules could ensure something like that. He does have to follow the law because, after all, he does not control the Dept. of Justice. If you are upset that Trump is smarter than you and can read the tax laws to figure out how to avoid paying taxes, you will just need to deal with it the best way you can. I'm sure most Americans believe it is necessary to pay taxes for the military (unless you are a Democrat). I wonder when CNN is going to take a poll asking if the federal government taxes the people too much, or wastes tax money on ridiculous programs, or spends too much money on wealth transfer payments. I am guessing that the "yes" response would be close to 100%.
The Clinton's effective tax rate was 31% on income of $10.6M. Without evaluating their taxes one can assume they deducted the $1M they donated to the Clinton foundation. Was that the "hypocritical answer" you were looking for? What was Trump's effective tax rate? Was he a net payer or net receiver from the federal tax system like the welfare crowd the right likes to rail about? I think we have a right to know.
Independent studies? There have been independent studies on Trump's worth? Interesting. I wonder how they did that study? What were the assumptions? What was the time frame used to value his properties? What cap rates were used? Having a brand name is valuable. It is called an "intangible asset", and it carries value and tax consequences. Therefore, the answer is "no" to your question concerning agreement on the "bogus" nature of Trump's net worth. His net worth can be defined in many ways; Book value, DCF modeling, sale at an arms-length transaction to a willing buyer, etc. The value of the Trump name (which is more than a "name", it is the economic value that reduces uncertainty to those that trade with Trump) is the value of the company over and above book value if sold. That amount would be amortized (that is similar to depreciation, which you also have no idea about) yearly on the tax return of the acquiring company. What we can agree on is that you have repeatedly demonstrated that you don't have the slightest clue as to how the business world actually works, and that you embarrass yourself every time you act as if you do. That puts you in lock step with most Democrats.
********. It's a game only you and I can play because the tax system is slanted to the holders of property and capital. It's slanted to limit the risk and purportedly to entice you and I to invest. "Middle class" don't have the wherewithal to stomach the loss and carry it forward. It's a top 10% game and one that helps keep those in the top 10% there. Can a middle class family take advantage? Yeah, but the margin of carrying that loss forward is much easier to bare when you have wealth. When you don't (i.e. sell a property for less than you paid for it) it can drive the average middle class family into bankruptcy or at least force them to work several more years towards retirement. False analogy? I'm saying net payer. You're trying to put caveats in to help your argument. How much money does a tax payer pay? Capital investment is riskier? It used to be. The reward can be astronomically greater too. Meanwhile, who paid your salary while you were in the Navy? The benefits you still enjoy? That union worker or Donald Trump? We don't know until Trump releases his taxes but his surrogates argument is that he's a "genius" for not paying into the systems that he claims to have made him a billionaire.
The next time you say something respectful will be the first time. Move on and let us have a meaningful discussion please.
I'll give you another lesson. He may not be able to separate his personal taxes and his business taxes. For instance, S-Corp and LLC owners (members, managers, etc.) have to pay taxes on their business personally. They cannot "separate" the two. They get a K-1 from the business that they have to include with their personal tax return. It may show a profit, or it may show a loss. It doesn't matter how much Trump made this year if he had prior losses that offset the current year's income. So the answer is "no", he doesn't necessarily have an obligation to pay taxes on this year's income. You see, the government only "takes" when you make money. They don't "give" when you lose money, and they don't send you back the taxes you previously paid when you lose money. You can only use the losses to offset future income. You are on your own when it comes to risk, and the government doesn't give a crap about you. Should the government have an obligation to give you money when you have a losing year since they take from you when you show a profit? Do the feds have a civic duty to help the risk taker when the risk taker loses?
So you're saying it takes intelligence, discipline, hard work, some measured risk taking, and thinking about your children and grandchildren to build wealth and assets. Got it. I would concede that if one lacks even one of those, their family will never make it to the top 10%. That investment/entrepreneurial mindset is what got the US and its economy to where it was. Trump's grandparents were immigrants and didn't have much of anything when they got here. We need to get away from this "the government should bail ME and MY student loans out," "where's MY bailout," "THOSE 10%ers should pay their fair share." There's too much ME and worrying about other people's money. Families build wealth by taking risks and investing for their CHILDREN. That's life. If you're risk adverse, that's fine. In today's world, you can live an incredibly affluent 1st World life in the American middle class AND still manage to save a nice little fund to pass along to your children. You won't be rich, but don't punish others for having the balls to go after it. There's too much victimization and discounting our potential on the liberal side. That's what Trump means when he talks about temperament (he really means mentality). This country is full of potential and greatness, but they're constantly fed this liberal bull that they're victims, that they have to rely on the government because the system isn't fair, that they need stupid worthless social programs to get ahead, etc. No...we need to relearn how to take personally take responsibility for our finances, our families, and our communities. How many countries are there where immigrants from the poorest parts of the world can go to LEGALLY and become wildly successful, wealthy, educated, and cultured within 1 generation if not the immigrant him/herself? Not many. Yes, the American culture of investment, entrepreneurship, innovation, creative marketing, with a little bit of ole fashioned wildcat risk taking is why America is one of those few. Husker, you're being ridiculous and clinging to an argument you know is wrong. There is no caveat investment income is inherently riskier. The world we live in would not exist if this economic law was untrue. Don't believe me? I have a whole bunch of stock picks and business pitches for you! I served in the Navy because I believed in liberty, capitalism, and the American spirit and sought to defend them. I was paid because a growing evolving economy fueled by investment and entrepreneurship generated jobs and tax revenues. Investment and entrepreneurship also drove all the wonderful technological wonders that have improved our quality of life. Those tax revenues were a combination of payroll taxes, sales taxes, excises taxes, corporate taxes, and capital gains taxes. You should also know that the people paying capital gains taxes are doubled taxed from corporate taxes. Additionally, a tax may be paid on a capital gain that was simply a function of inflation. The IRS adjusts the brackets for inflation every year for that, but the accounting of capital gains do no such thing. And while payroll taxes can be reduced dramatically by a variety of deductions every year, if you make money on an investment...you're going to pay for it. You can't avoid it. Knowing how capital gains taxes are levied mathematically defined, I have no doubt Trump has paid tens of millions in taxes in his life...certainly more than 99% of the US population.
The discussion has gone down discussing S-Corps and K-1s. Again, this is why Trump didn't release his taxes. Because partisan hacks will bait, switch, lie, deceive till the cows come home to distract from Hillary corruption.
Where do you think those jobs come from? From the people risking capital. Yeah, the top 10% play their "game", but the spectators (middle and lower classes) benefit in terms of jobs, technology improvements, wealth redistribution, etc. Move to Cuba if you want to see how the opposite works.
The only reason there is a "top 10%" , top 1%, or any percent in the economic system is because of the choices (value judgments/personal preferences)individuals (buyers and sellers) have made. Nothing is "skewed" for or against anyone unless the government is involved. The top 10% or the top 1% will vary widely over time based on value judgements made by the populace over time. There are many billionaires now that weren't even born when I graduated from UT.
As you all know, I'm generally unsympathetic to Trump and think he's blowing his chances all by himself, but this tax story is providing a clear illustration of blatant bias. When the mainstream media looks at suspicious activity by Hillary Clinton, they basically dismiss it as unimportant if she doesn't get charged with a crime by her political allies. By contrast, a piece of Trump's tax records get leaked, and they rip him for not paying taxes ON A ******* LOSS and for not even allegedly violating any civil or criminal laws. Furthermore, they engage in wild speculation about what he ended up paying in taxes in subsequent years. And consider how they're choosing to handle the issue of how the information was acquired. When Hillary and the DNC get hacked, they virtually ignore the content of what was hacked and focus on how they got hacked. However, Trump's confidential tax information was leaked, which means fiduciary duties were breached, but who's talking about that? Nobody.
I don't use Yahoo anymore. It was my home page for years, but now it's as if Rachel Maddow hand picked all the topics, except possibly for the "Keeping Up With The Kardashians" section. Pathetic. At least the front page of Google doesn't subject you to a Leftist indoctrination. This mass assault by the media is unprecedented. The entire MSM focused on achieving one thing, getting Hillary elected. All this drivel about Trump's taxes and the ex-beauty queen keeps the narrative off of Hillary. Nothing about her email or the Clinton Foundation or Bill's transgressions. Get Trump! That's all they care about. We saw this to a lesser extent in '12, but not like this. Oh, and Trump's '95 tax return just happened to show up anonymously in a reporter's mailbox...please!
