Donald Trump Acknowledges Not Paying Federal Income Taxes for Years

I'm not so sure it's mutually exclusive proposition in trumps case

 

Oh nonsense! It IS possible to "follow the law" and still be acting unethically - especially when you're running for the highest office. And right or wrong, since he won't release his returns, that's what it will look like to an objective observer: that one of the wealthiest citizens didn't pay taxes because he could take advantage of loopholes. And BTW doing so doesn't make you "smart" it only means you're "rich".

 

I believe that:
a) Trump probably won't change anything, and
b) HRC absolutely, and without any doubt, won't even try to change anything.

Which of the two offers a better chance of change?

 

It is quite obvious Hillary won't so as Trump said, "What do you have to lose?"

 

Yes, there is. It is the actual act of giving back to the community who made such success possible in the first place.

Not paying one's taxes could be defensible if one is too poor for it... but for bourgeois like Trump or HRC? If they don't believe in paying taxes, why are they forcing them on the people that cannot afford an offshore account or such "slick" sht?

It's a damn shame. And the fact that it is legal makes it even worse.

That's no surprise the West is going down. It is going down because it is corrupted.

Mine is closer to anger.

- - - Updated - - -

You would be surprised.

 

Seems the FBI didn't think any laws were violated by Hilary either. so no discussion there either?

 

You are a fool if you believe that those people are not one and the same.

 

False dichotomy, you forgot c) elect a third party candidate who will most definitely try to change things.

 

I believe there is crossover. Goldman Sacs, for instance, has it's tentacles all throughout washington; its alumni holding high-level positions. But WE enable it by re-electing status-quo over and over again.

The democrat voters have lost control of their side with regards to this, because the DNC picks the winners, and the will of The People is inconsequential to the outcome of their primary. The republicans, at least, are still bound to the will of their constituents, regardless of their efforts to maintain control. This is proven out by the nomination of Trump in spite of the RNC's every effort to thwart him.

If we are to break the back of the status-quo, and thereby effect change for The People, we must stop re-electing entrenched corruption, and start electing advocates of change.

 

The third party option has almost no chance of breaking the two-party swindle. They won't even allow a third party into the debate arena to WATCH the debates.

 

Cheating the tax code is bad and criminal.

 

Hilarious when the Godless left talks morality. There is no moral obligation to be stupid.

 

True, its a pipe dream, but if ever there was a chance to break the swindle its right now. There should be much more fervor than there is. I make just a bit over 6 figures and I pay enough taxes that it is painful. To find out that a) our tax system is so fvcked up that billionaires can get by for decades without paying taxes (and btw - I'm an engineer not a cpa. I did not think this was possible) and b) one of those billionaires actually wants to attain POTUS is infuriating. I don't understand the lack of outrage.

 

Where did he "cheat the tax code" ?

 

And he paid an average of 20%-21% except for one year where he paid 14% due to a very large charitable donation, and he did not even take all the deduction he could have, and the left trounced claiming he was dodging taxes.

So again

Romney paid 14% that year due to a VERY large charitable contribution and the left whined he was avoiding taxes and dodging taxes and now the left is salivating to get Trumps filing because they believe he does NOT make charitable contributions.

Care to reconcile that?

If Trump gave little to charity, the left will pounce on it, if it lowered his net taxes the left will pounce on it.

And no the highest income earners pay the highest marginal rates and the highest effective rates.



http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-0

 

No, I don't care to reconcile anything about Romney, his charitable giving, or any of the other straw men you are throwing my way, simply because I mentioned his name in a post on the actual topic of the thread. He's rich. Trump is rich. Most Americans aren't rich and had no idea what a rich person's tax returns look like, until they got a glimpse of Romney's and a page of Trump's. Now that we've seen not one, but two, wealthy persons' tax pages, we have a better idea of the kinds of deductions they use to lower their tax obligations and how that compares to middle class deductions.

I get that you want to go on a rant about people being critical of Romney's charitable giving, but I said nothing about it and have no desire or need to go down that rabbit hole with you.

 

I agree a third party is what will be required to break this chain of corruption. But the corrupt two-party system have stacked the deck to their own favor against any third party. Johnson, on that debate stage, would have seemed like an oasis of sanity, even in spite of his "Allepo" ignorance. His policy positions have some meat for both conservatives and liberals, but would require some compromise from both. But the two-party system will not allow a third party to gain any traction, because to do so would put the status-quo in jeopardy. Johnson has only one chance to become POTUS: Win at least ONE state, and get enough electoral votes to prevent either of the other two from reaching the required 270.

I am in the same income range as you, and found that hiring a tax attorney MORE than pays for his fee in recouping taxes back to my pocketbook.

 

When has the IRS ever charged him with cheating on his taxes?

 

He wasn't part of the body which drafts and amends the tax code. YOUR POLITICAN WAS. For 30 years.

This argument from the left is just stupid. I really is.

He follows the tax code, takes exemptions allowed, and then gets hammered for not either:

1. Sending in more (like anybody does that)

2. Claiming he will not fix the problem because it benefits him (like your candidate for the last 30 years)

The left, and your post, are reactionary based on emotion and victimization.

 

Quit defending him...he used you and is other duped fans and played you guys like fiddles. The right wingers that fell for Trump's line of bull (*)(*)(*)(*) remind me of abused wives in denial. You were victimized by placing faith in a snake oil salesman...not I...

 

Success in business is determined by ability to gain wealth. End of story.

Business doesn't and shouldn't have a moral obligation to operate under the emotional requirements you desire.

American economic SUCCESS is built upon a foundation of what you call "greed", or what others call freedom.

The problem is, the progressive left desire to use the tax code as a means of picking winners and losers and funding their pet projects geared to the collective verse business who is geared to making money.

 

No, but he WAS part of the party that paid the party that drafts and amends the tax code.

 

I early on said I would vote for Johnson, I have in fact voted Libertarian since Bush41. But he blew and even if one state does not vote for either Trump or Clinton and it does get tossed to Congress it won't be Johnson. Right now it would most likely be Trump. Johnson would have to get a majority of the states. I don't think that is going to happen.

Me, I'm writing in either Kasich or Rubio at this point, even thinking about Pence.

 

I am hearing more pundits describing Trumps campaign as THE third party run people have longed for. He just has to do it through the Republican party.

 

Indeed, but individuals do. In light of the knowledge that trump hasn't paid taxes in years I find it the absolute pinnacle of hypocrisy that he would criticize our infrastructure. Maybe the reason the airports are so nice in Qatar is because their billionaires pay their share of the taxes.