Income tax

The Lessons Americans Refuse To Learn From Trump's Tax Returns

Major-party politicians avoid tax simplification almost as aggressively as the rich avoid taxation, argue the Reason Roundtable panelists.


Asked about The New York Times' novella-length article analyzing his last 18 years of federal income tax returns, President Donald Trump said: "It's fake news. It's totally fake news. Made up, fake."

That hasn't stopped people from discussing Trump's inventive accounting, to a chorus of sputtered outrage by Trump's legion of critics, the vast majority of whom miss a simple point: The tax code is a big, complicated mess because major-party politicians—including those Republicans who insincerely promise to fit the entire form "on a postcard"—like it just fine that way, and voters do not punish them for perennially exacerbating the exasperating status quo.

So argue Nick Gillespie, Peter Suderman, Matt Welch, and Katherine Mangu-Ward on this week's Reason Roundtable podcast. The gang also previews tomorrow night's presidential debate (including those unfairly excluded from it), grapples with the Supreme Court nomination of Amy Coney Barrett, and makes a number of editorially questionable sound effects.

Audio production by Ian Keyser and Regan Taylor.

Music: "Sentinel" by Kai Engel.

Relevant links from the show:

"Trump's Tiny Tax Bill," by Elizabeth Nolan Brown

"Libertarian Party Candidate Jo Jorgensen: Don't Waste Your Vote on Trump or Biden," by Nick Gillespie

"Congress Continues to Spend Delusional Amounts of Money," by Veronique de Rugy

"On Health Care, the 2020 Presidential Race Pits Bad Ideas Against Bad Faith," by Peter Suderman

"Amy Coney Barrett Condemns Purdue University's 'Fundamentally Unfair' Adjudication of Sexual Assault Claims," by Jacob Sullum

"It's Official: Trump Nominates Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court," by Billy Binion

"Amy Coney Barrett and the Problem of Conservative Judicial Deference," by Damon Root

"Amy Coney Barrett Thinks the Second Amendment Prohibits Blanket Bans on Gun Possession by People With Felony Records," by Jacob Sullum

"Amy Coney Barrett Demolishes the Qualified Immunity Claim of a Detective Accused of Framing a Man for Murder," by Jacob Sullum

"Partisan Poppycock Does Not Trump the Constitution on SCOTUS Picks," by Jacob Sullum

"Antebellum Is Empty Social Commentary Disguised as a Horror Movie," by Peter Suderman

What are we consuming this week?

Matt Welch

Katherine Mangu-Ward

Peter Suderman

NEXT: Jo Jorgensen: Don't Waste Your Vote on Trump or Biden

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The main lesson they forget or just refuse to learn:

    Taxation is theft.

    1. And corporate taxation is double theft.

      1. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new… after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

        Here’s what I do…>> Click here

      2. And sales taxes, since the income to pay for stuff was already taxed. Or, taxation is transaction based and will happen many times to the same “dollar” as it changes hands.

    2. Taxes are simply the fees we all pay to live in a civilized society. I’m happy to pay a certain percentage of my income to ensure that the roads are paved and every child has equal access to education. I wish I could say that the police also serve and protect the citizens of America but the tragedy of George Floyd’s murder show that this is simply not the case.

      1. “Taxes are simply the fees we all pay to live in a civilized society.”

        Only a fraction of our taxes go towards a civil society.

        Most of it goes to unnecessary government employees and wealth redistribution programs–neither of which are related to civil society.

        1. Ironically criminal law enforcement (i.e. Police) are what maintains a civil society – the rest just destroys it. Subsidize’s criminal activity.

          1. I’m not a big fan of the no-knock, shoot first police that we now have.

        2. and their exorbitant pensions

        3. Taxes don’t bring in even half of government income. Most of it comes from borrowing. There’s no reason why government can’t reduce spending by half and just end taxes. It can keep on borrowing and just be a regular pyramid scheme, without the taxation.

      2. “to ensure that the roads are paved”

        Oh. My. God. You just went full retard with a “muh roads!” comment.

        1. “to ensure that the roads are paved” – which is taxed at the gas pump.

          1. And in bonds and then shifted to general funds so they can tax again for roads.

            1. And then leave the roads to rot anyway.

              1. needz moar crumbling infrastructure, sure to be mentioned in the debates

          2. The Tax at the gas pump has not kept up with the cost of maintain the roads. No one in Congress has the guts to raise the tax appropriately (nor figured out how to tax the electric vehicles).

            Of course we could make every road a toll road…

            1. California raised it inappropriately, but it still doesn’t cover the graft and corruption to build and repair decent roads

            2. just and FYI – State Congress/Legislature. The federal really has no business in road maintenance.

      3. I wish I could say that the police also serve and protect the citizens of America but the tragedy of George Floyd’s murder show that this is simply not the case.

        So, by your own assertion, at least some of your taxes are fees paid to live in an uncivilized society.

      4. “but the tragedy of George Floyd’s murder suicide by ‘hooping’ show that this is simply not the case.”

        Fixed that one for you, too Jew Man Foo.

        1. Right.. George Floyd resisted arrest. End of story. In the “Civilized Society” Rabbi.. speaks of; justice isn’t determined by street fights with law enforcement – it’s determined by court rulings.

          1. Is English your first language?

      5. “to ensure that the roads are paved” . . . whether they need paving or not.

        “every child has equal access to education”

        Why should every child have equal access to education? I think they should probably all get a minimum, but the idea that wealthy people shouldn’t be free to pay extra to get a better education than they offer in public schools is absurd.

        P.S. I worked my way through a private boarding school.

        1. Wealthy do pay and get more exclusive education. Not sure about better.
          The theory is that educated people contribute to society and thus the money is better spent upfront ensuring a minimum level (High School).
          Interested to see your counter study that says otherwise.

            1. ^lmao… No, no; con_fused needs a propaganda, cherry-picked contrary to the obvious document signed by a lefty twit-science in order to receive “confirmation”.

          1. 60% of US school children graduate (or finish) high school, as illiterates, and innumerates. The system doesn’t work. There’s no accountability on the part of the student, or parent.

            The market responds by refusing them jobs, or careers. Democrats think it’s foul…it’s just rationality at work. No consumer wants to pay western living wages for people who can’t pass algebra.

        2. I’m hearing that libertarians want the wealthy to pave their privately owned roads with the malnourished bodies of uneducated, poor children. But shouldn’t they be used as cheap labor instead?

      6. “…I’m happy to pay a certain percentage of my income to ensure that the roads are paved and every child has equal access to education…”

        Goodie for you. Now pay mine.

      7. But the roads aren’t all paved and children don’t have equal access to education.

        1. “don’t have equal access to education” — they did before the *free* education lobby hit congress.

      8. Gas taxes pay for the roads.
        Property taxes pay for the schools.

      9. Taxes are the price we pay because society is uncivilized.

    3. I don’t like this terminology even though I’m a libertarian. The problem with this claim is that it’s inaccurate. Taxation cannot be theft, since theft is an illegal act, while taxation is pretty legal, whether we like it or not. Now of course we can discuss taxation policies, and we can and should advocate as ‘low as possible’ taxes and as ‘small as possible’ redistribution schemes. But calling taxation theft per se is a bit childish and I’d wager it takes away from our policies. That’s one of the main reasons why many non-libertarian considers libertarians, minarchists and free market advocates loonies.

      Furthermore, calling any and all taxation theft, just like that, is no better than the democrats’ claim that ‘Trump is a tax fraud’ even though all he did is paying his taxes smartly but within the constrains of the tax code.

      1. Theft is taking of property from it’s rightful owner.

        It doesn’t cease to be there because a magic thing called a law says it’s not

        1. There= theft

          Damn auto-incorrect

        2. Laws aren’t magical though one might ascribe such a quality to them considering their pivotal role in building human societies and civilization itself.

          But as I stated, taxation is legal, while theft is an act that is illegal. There’s no logic in stating that taxation is theft, since it cannot possible be legal and illegal at the same time, this isn’t particle physics.

          1. Tax is criminal – there… Fixed it for you. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see the gun-threatening (i.e. gov) taking things from others for the purpose of ‘Peter wants more lazy pay, a ferrari, a pool, unlimited healthcare, unemployment, retirement RV and a *free* Harvard education’ is criminal. Be it law or not; it’s criminal. Criminals are always ‘victims’ just ask them.

            Very few things are truly necessary and they’re outlined in the Constitution’s enumerated powers. We all pay a little for national defense and it’s important enough to gun-force exist because without it we’d be taken over by the Nazi’s but even military powers (by the Constitution) should be temporary and WE ALL get that security service that we must pay for in order to maintain the USA as the USA.

            Today; 99% of gov policy has nothing to do with the nations own survival but has to do with criminally stealing that hard-working responsible mans stuff so lazy, whiny, drug-addicted, useless (90% probably criminal) selfish members of society can spend more-time crying about their so called ‘victim-hood’ instead of being an asset to society (i.e. anyone else besides themselves).

            1. the army is supposed to be funded only 2 years at a time. and no, the Nazis wouldn’t have been able to take over the USA.

          2. Theft is immoral. There’s even a commandment against it. Doesn’t matter if it’s been enshrined by the law; theft is theft.

            1. Is the commandment against theft right after the one against rape?

          3. “Taxation is legal, while theft is an act that is illegal.”

            Theft is wrong regardless of whether it’s legal just like when the government violates someone’s rights, it’s an injustice regardless of whether such injustices are legal.

            What Eichman did was evil, but it wasn’t illegal.


            Justice isn’t the dependent variable in the equation of the law. If the law says it isn’t a crime, then it’s okay? Nah.

            Rather, if the law is unjust, then it’s the law that’s wrong. And laws are often wrong.

            1. Theft is wrong… that’s right. But theft cannot be legal, and no, taxation isn’t a legal form of theft, since again, theft can only be illegal.

              Now if you say that taxation is wrong, I can agree to that. If you say taxation is a sin, I can agree to that too. But if you say that taxation is a legal form of theft, then this is gibberish. Again, it’s not my fault that theft has a valid definition in place that clearly and explicitly states that it must be an illegal act. Taxation, whether we like or not, is legal.

              Same with your examples: it was evil, yes, and it was legal at the time as per Nazi Germany’s rules. Still, it was wrong, and yes, punishing Eichmann also posed legal questions related to jurisdiction etc… But this has nothing to do with the above semantics. Most people agree today that what the Nazis did was wrong, irrespective, but there’s no question about the legality of their policies. It was legal all right, same with taxation, which is legal (and therefore not a theft), irrespective of any moral considerations.

              So yes, if the law is ‘unjust’, then it is a bad law, although we need to emphasize that this is relative. A rabid leftist will not have the same judgment on taxation as you. And yes, laws are often wrong but again, this is only my libertarian minarchism speaking, which is likewise subjective. The only objective thing we can more or less agree on, is whether there’s a law in place or not, and whether it allows something or not.

        3. Theft is taking of property from it’s rightful owner.

          It doesn’t cease to be there because a magic thing called a law says it’s not.

          It’s because of silly arguments like these that nobody takes you libertarians seriously. Rightful ownership is defined by the law. If the law says 20% of your income goes to the government, then you are not the rightful owner of that 20%.

          1. It’s justifying theft like that that makes you evil

          2. This is garbage. The law is a fantasy. Our rights are reality–regardless of whether the law believes in them. You can tell because when a fantasy collides with reality, it’s the fantasy that falls apart.

            It used to be against the law to possess cannabis in California. That law was ridiculous. People possessed cannabis in California anyway, and eventually the law fell to pieces because it didn’t conform with reality.

            In both the Soviet Union and communist China, the law used to say that private property was wrong. They murdered millions of their own people to try to make that fantasy a reality, but in the end, they had to change the law to conform to reality again–the reality being that any economy not grounded in private property is doomed to failure (not to mention starvation).

            In Alabama, they once had a law that said Rosa Parks wasn’t allowed to sit in the front of a public bus because of her race. That law was based on a stupid fantasy, and when Rosa Parks and others asserted reality, the fantasy of the law was shattered to pieces.

            Stealing the private property of others through coercive taxation is unjust regardless of whether it’s legal, and we suffer the negative consequences of a government that steals people’s property–no matter what the law says.

            The law is a fantasy. Agency is reality. And when the law imagines that violating our rights is perfectly legal and that they can do it without suffering negative consequences for it, it’s delusional. When I think of all that money that could be going to productive use in our economy and just gets spent by the government instead, it makes me sad. When I see people that seem to claim that the law can change the reality of injustice and somehow make it just, that only makes me think they’re delusional.

            1. The law is a fantasy.

              I challenge you to file your tax return with these words written on every line, instead of the required numbers.

              1. Because the government can punish you for not acting as if you believe in their ridiculous fantasy doesn’t turn that fantasy into reality. It just means the government is being stupid and unjust.

            2. Rights are a fantasy too, but a useful one if we want to live in a peaceful and prosperous civilization. In reality you can have whatever you can take, but that leads to a lot of taking and a lot of violence. Governments try to monopolize the right to violence, to stop the retribution from going back and forth forever.

              1. Rights are the obligation to respect people’s choices, and they’re as real as the ability to make choices itself.

              2. “Spooks” and “ghosts in the mind” for Stirner, “nonsense on stilts” for Bentham.

                Natural rights might be to some extent socially constructed to service a kind of rule utilitarianism, but they are at least grounded in a transcending proscriptive morality. Unlike theistic philosophers, as far as I can tell, atheistic theorists of liberal individualism had no use for the concept until the mid-twentieth century.

          3. “…It’s because of silly arguments like these that nobody takes you libertarians seriously…”

            It’s because of bullshit like this that we despise lefty shits and wish they would fuck off and die, lefty shit.

            1. After that logical and calm reply, I just have to start taking you and your ideas seriously.

              1. Your argument was sophomoric. Why expect more?

                1. Wow, you guys really can’t back up your positions. I am disappointed. I thought I could have a good debate here.

                  1. The fact you are unable to read the arguments correctly isn’t necessarily an argument itself.

                    For instance, I’d bet you my yearly income that the vast majority of 3rd graders worldwide don’t understand calculus, but it doesn’t make calculus invalid anymore than your obtuseness makes this one invalid.

          4. If the government were to say that you were it’s property would that not be slavery?

            1. It would. But what does that have to do with tax laws?

              1. Everything… If you work for nothing but what taxes takes and are required to work how is that not being a slave of the state? Didn’t the plantation owners feed and shelter their slaves too? How can you actually claim to own anything if tax steals it all? You’re not paid for you labors; you’re being taxed into slavery.

                Reminds me of this idiotic idea of free-healthcare. We all know the government’s politicians aren’t all doctors offering their services for free so who is going to be the slaves to offer this free-stuff? If the gov tells them to work for $0.01/hr is that somehow an exception to the term slave?

                1. But that’s not true for anybody in this country. Nobody pays more than 37 percent of their income in taxes. So none of your arguments are persuasive.

                  Nobody is expecting doctors to work for free if there is universal health care. That’s not how it works in any countries that have free health care. Surely you know this. So why do you pretend like doctors would be forced to work for free? That’s a terrible argument.

                  1. Because that’s the end result – what happens if you live in a remote area of Alaska with only one doctor and they refuse to work for what they’ll be paid under universal healthcare?

                    Hint: It involves guns and coercion…

                    1. “what happens if you live in” – the USA – “with only one doctor and they refuse to work for what they’ll be paid”..

                      You see ‘Serentity Now’ the whole point of “Universal Healthcare” is the gov-guns!!! How is paying a doctor what they will work for in a free market any different than paying the doctor – period! The gov-guns used to STEAL or ENSLAVE. If there is no stealing or enslaving the government (guns) DOESN’T need to be involved.

                  2. No, it is the first step of an argument.

                    You seem to accept that forcing one to work for free is wrong.

                    If taxing 100% is wrong, what percentage does it become right?

          5. It’s because of silly arguments like this that you can’t be taken seriously. “Rightful ownership is defined by law,” you say. So, if you lived in a time (or if you currently lived in certain modern countries such as Libya), you could have legal ownership of another human being and that ownership would rightful, according to you?

            It is governments that make laws, period. Some are just, such as prohibitions against murder and rape. All kinds of laws are unjust: from burning supposed witches and gassing Jews to more modern laws like locking up 13-year-olds for blasphemy or locking up many people for possessing or smoking a fucking plant. There is nothing inherently “rightful” about a particular behavior by a government simply because the government has formalized that practice as law.

            Unless, of course, you believe that might makes right, in which case you believe in authoritarianism.

          6. Government does not legislate property rights into existence. Ideally, it recognizes and enforces them. But it also isn’t as simple as some right-libertarians make it out to be when they presuppose that the current distribution of wealth is more or less just, so any systemic reforms that result in wealth redistribution (perhaps non-consentually, but also, strictly speaking, non-aggressively) must therefore be unjust.

        4. As a society, the majority of us have agreed to allow some taxation under a give set of rules.

          We’ve done other things, like given up the right to revenge and deferred to the legal system.

          1. or we haven’t agreed, but we’re not dumb enough to fight the government over it

            1. This.

              I pay my taxes because I understand the real threat behind the extortion. If I don’t pay them, they put me in jail, and I don’t want to go to jail.

              1. …and if you defy jail – you’ll be shot. So really it is just like an armed criminal stealing property with a loaded gun and shooting who ever doesn’t hand over their wallet.

      2. So, the holocaust wasn’t murder? After all, it was done legally.

        1. This is all bullshit. Everyone here argues how Rule of Law is the underpinning of libertarian ideology when justifying everything they like about government (I.e. Trump). But now it’s not? Which is it?

          1. Rule of law is great when the law actually upholds people’s rights rather than smashes them. If you want people to respect laws, then don’t make it so easy for peaceful people to break them. Lao Tzu said there is much injustice in many laws, or something to that effect. Overlegislating is counterproductive and harmful to civil liberties.

            It’s an uphill battle when you’re dealing with a permanent legislature and a low-trust public constantly clamoring for the highest level of government to “do” something to remedy every societal problem. Libertarians need to frame a positive message with reference to positive humanitarian social goals. Decades of negative anti-this, anti-that, leave-me-alone, collective-decision-making-is-immoral messaging hasn’t gotten us anywhere.

          2. “Everyone here”???? You TDS-characters are so full of sh*t… I didn’t see a single libertarian here cheering on the Cares Act – yet, predictably some whack-a-doodles show up claiming such delusional garbage. Pull your heads out of the fantasy of your own *ss 🙂

      3. If you’re going to stand on principle, sometimes people look at you funny.
        People don’t grasp that taxation is theft because they don’t see any other way to fund the government. But they’re assuming we need ONE government for everyone. Let people sign up for the government they want instead. Republicans live under a Republican government. Democrats live under a Democrat government. Libertarians live under a Libertarian government. You don’t get the benefits you don’t pay for, and you don’t pay for the benefits you don’t want.

        Crimes would be adjudicated in the victim’s courts. No victim no crime (unless you agree to live under a government that prosecutes non-crimes).

        1. That’s a beautiful idea, but it won’t work because governments would not like the competition. Or, if it did happen, the non-Libertarian governments would restrict any movement outside their area, Berlin Wall-style, to prevent people from going where they grass is greener.

        2. Overlapping one-party government jurisdictions within some kind of meta-panarchistic, contractarian framework is a terrible idea. Are Democrats and Republicans going to drag a Libertarian to one of their own criminal courts over the commission of a victimless crime? Will class action civil suits have to be filed in all three jurisdictions, all with their own attorneys, judges, partisan juries, procedures, and precedents? A homeless person who hasn’t signed on with one of the available governments is murdered. Has no crime been committed? If it is regarded as a “crime against humanity”, which government prosecutes? Is there an intergovernmental court with its own rules? What if one of the governments disputes the ruling and wants to appeal? What about children who cannot enter a valid, legally binding contract? Could, say, NAMBLA supporters establish their own pederasty-friendly government to evade age of consent laws in other jurisdictions?

          Even if such a political arrangement were feasible, it would hardly be desirable.

        3. Except; the part you’re missing is SLAVERY of OTHERS… What stopping the DNC from starting a DNC Co-op Contract Membership? NOT the Republicans, NOT the Libertarians..

          Democrats could have all the Universal Healthcare they want, Build all the windmills they want, Drive all the EV cars they want.

          The Kicker here – REPUBLICANS AREN’T STOPPING THEM….

          But that’s not REALLY what they want… They want totalitarian (everyone i.e. [WE] foundation) dictatorship. It’s not about getting what they want; its about TAKING what they want from the UN-WILLING….

      4. “Taxation is theft” (extortion is probably a more accurate term) is a losing slogan that gets no traction with the general population. Most people are okay with taxation on some level because they view it as necessary, “necessary” being left open to ideological interpretation. It’s the waste and corruption they despise, and the impression that the people who can afford to contribute the most in taxes are the ones best positioned to avoid them. If libertarians care to get anywhere with the public, then they need to meet people where they are and quit their masturbatory moralistic bludgeoning. All non-libertarians hear is, “I damn well deserve everything in my possession. Take your public institutions and social services, and shove ’em up your ass. Civilization can crumble and burn for all I care. Got a problem with that? GTFO. You’re an evil collectivist, and I’m better than you.”

        1. …and the part ‘collectivists’ will never acknowledge. “I damn well spent hours of sweat and labor *earned*!!!!! my possessions; so under what freak-of-nature law do you feel entitled to my slavery!”…

          The party of slavery — always…

    4. Start making cash online work easily from home.i have received a paycheck of $24K in this month by working online Abe from home.i am a student and i just doing this job in my spare ?Visit Here


    Also there’s something even more worrisome than that the NYT appears not to have seen the actual returns. Read this closely and you’ll see something very disturbing indeed.

    …Did you see it? The years of employee compensation? So the NYT was given compensation information for people who are not Donald Trump. Yeah, that right there should make everyone spit fire from their eyes. What the hell right does the NYT have to employee compensation?
    You want to claim Trump is fair game since he’s President, fine, whatever. But what people who worked for him made in the decades when he wasn’t a politician is fair how? Riddle me that and you better spin so hard the Earth rotates backwards.
    Also, I’m going to post this one more time for those in the back. Trump paid $1 million in taxes in 2016 and $4.2 million in taxes in 2017 and, per the NYT story, most of that money was rolled forward. Stop LYING. Start READING. Just. Stop. Lying.

    1. In fairness here, if I pay 50K with my extension and my tax comes out to zero then no, I didn’t pay taxes. I still have that credit in my account. I could ask for a refund. Until that overpayment is applied then I can’t really say I paid the taxes as I can ask for a refund in any following year where the overpayment is not applied. I have an asset of prepaid taxes worth 50K.

      I mean honestly, if the dude was struck by lightning and had no taxes due with his last return then guess what – there is a refund on the last return.

  3. I would argue Biden is more responsible for the tax code than Trump. What Trumps did on his tax returns wasn’t unique or even uncommon. Hell, we have megacorps that have declaring bankruptcy in their business model. We have oil companies that pump millions of barrels of oil off public lands for free.

    I think it’d be more telling if Trump had paid a lot of taxes he didn’t have to.

    Warren Buffett pays almost NO taxes and hasn’t for decades because he never cashes out. It’s one of the reasons that Berkshire has never paid a dividend. A good businessman lets his assets grow. Those assets grow faster the less taxes you pay on them.

    1. Apple does the same thing

      1. Berkshire and Apple have more than enough capital. That’s why, for example, Apple occasionally buys back its own shares. They both don’t pay dividends because they have smart managers, and dividends are stupid. As a shareholder why would I want dividends, which take out of my control the ability to determine how much cash to take out of my investment and when I want to recognize taxable income? Much better to sell shares, in the timing I desire.

        1. AAPL has paid a healthy dividend for nearly a decade.

          Where have you been?

  4. Mash Letter from The Donald to Leona Helmsley

    Roses are red,
    Violets are blue,
    Won’t you come here,
    And join my crew?
    I like to collect babes, as if they were Cocker Spaniels,
    You’d look quite nice, right next to Stormy Daniels!
    You’d look VERY sexy, in my Biggly harem,
    With my YUUGE donors, I like to share ’em!
    “Taxes are for the little people”
    For a campaign slogan, it sounds GREAT!
    Won’t you help me fool the greedy sheeple?
    To their suffering, you and I, we could masturbate!
    Brad Parscale, my old campaign pal,
    Wants to kill himself, what style!
    Won’t you stay with me a while,
    And be my campaign gal?

    1. Fuck off Slaver.

    2. “SQRLSY One
      July.2.2020 at 5:11 pm
      Port-a-potties ARE buffets”


      1. Lol. He admitted he eats poop.

        1. R Mac admitted that it is enslaved to the Evil One, AKA the “Father of Lies”!!! The apple does not fall far from the tree!

          Look HERE for healing, if you can swallow your massive ego, and your insatiable appetite for lies! M. Scott Peck, The People of the Lie,

          1. Fuck off, Sqrlsy.

          2. No he didn’t. Quote it.

            Meanwhile your quote is right there.

            1. ANOTHER liar; ANOTHER slave to the Evil One, AKA the “Father of Lies”! That is why folks call Tulpa the “Tulpatanator”.

              1. Fuck off and die, spaz

        1. Do you find it strange you only link to wapo, Atlantic, etc?

          1. So JesseSPAZ… What sources… Besides Rash Limbarfer, Ann Coulter, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, and Caligula, do you consider to be credible? Drunks under bridges, so long as the agree with YOU, right, intellectually impoverished one?

            1. It amazes me how you seem to think everyone gets their ‘source’ from x,y,z media source. Some of us LIVE and experience and have our own brains that process information; obviously, that might be something new for you.

              1. I’m doubting he ever had an actual job. Definitely never worked at growing a company.

                1. Your tin-foil hat is in SERIOUS need of a re-calibration!

            2. I’m just curious why you solely used leftist sources. Do you buy 3 subscriptions and get Shit Eating Monty for free?

              I mean, it explains why you seem to be so economically ignorant. I was just curious.

        2. Fuck off, Sqrlsy.

  5. Did I miss something or is Reason completely avoiding talking about Hunter Biden being wired 4 million dollars from Russia while his father was acting Vice President of the United States?

    1. You didn’t miss anything.

      Did you know its illegal for US companies to hire the adult offspring of foreign government officials, on the grounds that its corrupting?

    2. I’m sure he paid taxes on that. That’s what really matters now.

    3. Hunter Biden is just a superior business man than Donald Drumpf. That is why he’s able to make money in Ukraine and the Dotard in Chief has to write off bad business decisions to receive tax breaks. Regardless, people should leave the children of politicians out of the discussion and try to elevate political discourse in America.

      1. If you think bidens kids aren’t givng him a kick back your a fool

        1. Really? Trump sh*t doesn’t stink but there is a maybe that Hunter Biden made extra money and maybe sent some of it to his dad? Wow, you are delluded.

          FYI, startup companies need financial backing. Investment firms in the US want 51% – 90% of the company and a timer clause so the investment company gets it all if targets aren’t met on time.
          Meanwhile, their are foreign billionaires that are trying to invest. So there firms that try to put the two together (startup and investors) with much better terms for the startup company. And yes, 9 out of 10 the investor looses. Welcome to the real world.
          The NY Post article said the money went through Biden’s company and ended up in some laptop/tablet manufacturer.
          Meanwhile, Trump owes 500million to others, including foreign banks. If he looses he is up shits creek. What line will Trump refuse to cross to remain in power… err I mean get re-elected?

          1. Meanwhile, Trump owes 500million to others, including foreign banks

            Never mind most of that is tied up in mortgages that he’s actually making payments on.

            If you have a mortgage and credit card debt, you “owe to others,” too, you dingus.

      2. “Hunter Biden is just a superior business man crony than Donald Trump.”

        Fixed that for you!

    4. Acting is even close to what Joe biden did

  6. No one is missing the point. Everyone knows the rich avoid taxes. The whole point is that his whole schtick was “to fight for the little guy”.

    When presented with an opportunity for tax reform, he and his fellow Republicans LOWERED taxes even more on the richie riches and added 2 trillion to the debt.

    Only a complete moron would see that he has only made it WORSE than it was before. But hey, let’s await the “libertarians” here who will somehow excuse doubling the deficit and lobbing 10% more of the debt on top.

      1. Of course you do. You’re him.

    1. every American a better option than Zombie Biden, so …

    2. “Only a complete moron would see that he has only made it WORSE than it was before.”

      Own goal.

    3. Economics 101: for the economy as a whole deficits per se are irrelevant. What matters is the level of government spending. We are going to pay for that spending through current taxes, future taxes or inflation.

    4. Oh, the famous and delusional cries of, “Less Taxation” = WORSE…
      and the missing but given is “More Taxation” = GOOD.

      Bunch of gov-is-my-pimp minded people sometimes.

    5. “No one is missing the point. Everyone knows the rich avoid taxes. The whole point is that his whole schtick was “to fight for the little guy”…”
      Pointing out how to avoid taxes is certainly of help to anyone paying taxes.
      Strike one.

      “When presented with an opportunity for tax reform, he and his fellow Republicans LOWERED taxes even more on the richie riches and added 2 trillion to the debt.”
      No great surprise that your cite fell off; you are full of shit. I’m a LONG ways from ‘richie riches’ and my taxes dropped quite a bit. And then ‘starving the beast’ is a perfectly valid tactic.
      Strike two.

      “Only a complete moron would see that he has only made it WORSE than it was before. But hey, let’s await the “libertarians” here who will somehow excuse doubling the deficit and lobbing 10% more of the debt on top.”
      Bullshit lefty assertions.
      Strike three.
      You’re OUT, you pathetic piece of lefty shit.

  7. I was self employed for years. I was partner in a corp. for several years and after I left I had enough loss to not pay federal taxes for two years. I took every write of that was legal. I still didn’t get to keep the money, it when to someone . Write offs aren’t free money. I don’t care if Trump’s ACCOUNING FIRM took every deduction possible. That’s what their paid for and believe me you, he doesn’t do his own taxes.On another note, his tax return, yours, mine , what ever , is no one else’s business.

    1. A lot of people don’t realize you have to spend to get a write off and sometimes coming up with the money to purchase something to write off is hard and the write never covers the full amount of money spent

      1. deductibles should go entirely – they’re part of the picking losers and winners scheme of gov code. Everyone should be taxed the same. If people have to live to go to work their living expenses in all fairness would be a “write-off” and no one would be paying taxes.

        I’d like to see all money taxed evenly and fairly at an extremely low rate (0.05%) instead of x,y,z purchase is tax-free deductibles.

        1. Agreed. But until then we live by the rules as written. Taxes should be minimal to cover oy government services prescribed by the constitutions.

        2. deductibles should go entirely – they’re part of the picking losers and winners scheme of gov code. Everyone should be taxed the same.

          That can work with individuals who aren’t self-employed, but beyond that it arbitrarily over taxes people in overhead-heavy fields. If I’m a grading contractor, for example, I may spend (as a self-employed individual) hundreds of thousands or even millions every year on equipment costs alone, not to speak of employing people, while a stand-up comedian spends nothing. Should I be taxed on my millions in revenue at the same rate that the comedian is taxed on his tens of thousands (understanding that the “take home pay” is roughly the same)?

          1. ” Should I be taxed on my millions in revenue at the same rate that the comedian is taxed on his tens of thousands” — Yes.

            You’ve grown immune to the ‘winners’ entitled idea that your costs (say equipment to do a job) should be free of tax while the comedian who spends thousands a year on rent, food and YES, even equipment (i.e. A vehicle) to get to work (which is all required to be a comedian) is not.

            Yes, you do turn over a lot more money; but with that extra money-turn-over there offers more ability to profit more. If you’re turning over millions and are in poverty its time to change business ventures. Just like the comedian with a car vs. without one; he must decide if the registration, insurance, tax, etc… Is worth the free-market “fair taxed” ability to be a success.

            Thus; I still hold to my original assertion.

            1. …but will add; With all transactions taxed the same the theory is a super low across-the-board tax rate would generate the same more fairly – I utterly protest any idea of growing total tax revenue.

      2. Yes, but you have to spend on things that are deductible.
        Your personal car, unless you use it exclusively for business travel, is not 100% deductible. Ditto for your home. Barron’s private school. Melania’s whatever.
        To pay 0 in taxes, you either had very low income or borrowed from your savings.

        Buy a beach house, rent it out, and you can use it for 2 weeks a year and deduct just about all your expenses (including travel to and from the beach house…. because you are going there for maintenance purposes). Buy that same beach house and don’t rent it out, its no longer a business. You typically can deduct improvements from the final sales of the property (and maybe pay capital gains rates instead of full income rates). NY Times seems to report that Trump has lots of private residencies that he deducts expenses from. I guess if he can convince the IRS he needs that 200 Acre land to get ready for the next season of the Apprentice… its a business expense.

        1. As you just described, per the IRS code, if he spends less than 2 weeks a year at any of “his” properties they can be considered businesses even if the only purpose they serve is to appreciate. (His in quotes, as they are possibly owned by single-partner LLC’s, so they might be his by one layer of abstraction, but for tax purposes they kind of work like sole proprietorship)

          His rivals in DC howling about his tax rate are mostly the same people who wrote the laws that make it legal for him to pay what he does. This is their fault , not his. How many of them pay more than is legally required, just to be “fair?” How is he different from Warren Buffet, who pays hardly anything, but is considered a “good guy” because he admits that his taxes are absurdly low?

          The tax kerfuffle is a case for less, and simplified tax, but of course the left doesn’t see that.

          They wouldn’t be happy unless he voluntarily gave up his entire salary. Oh, wait…

    2. The question of tax returns is one of transparency.
      You get to see where his money comes from and to whom is he beholden.
      There is arguably a public interest in that. I’m not saying laws haven’t been broken.

      And in the case of Trump, we also find out what else is he lying about.
      We also find out that he may be in deep financial trouble with up to $500million coming due in the next few years. Sucks if your president has to declare bankruptcy (again) this time while in office.

      1. You get to see where his money comes from and to whom is he beholden.
        There is arguably a public interest in that. I’m not saying laws haven’t been broken.

        Except it wasn’t just his returns the Times went through. It was also dozens of people who worked for him as well.

        The Times basically committed hundreds of violations of the Privacy Act, all to get the Bad Orange Man. If there were any real justice, that entire news bureau would get Charlie Hebdo’d, in Minecraft.

  8. “Major-party politicians avoid tax simplification almost as aggressively as the rich avoid taxation”


    “The only thing that saves us from the bureaucracy is inefficiency”

    —-Eugene McCarthy

    The real world is complicated, and a tax system that doesn’t reflect that reality is bound to be deeply flawed. If they made it easy, we might be sorry.

    “And the trees were all made equal by hatchet, ax, and saw”.

    —-Neil Peart

    There’s a simple solution for you.

    Authoritarian systems are full of simple solutions. Once you have to start taking reality and people’s rights into consideration, everything gets messy. This person wants that. That person wants this. Why can’t they just make it simple so that nobody gets what they want–that’s what libertarianism is all about?!

    Here’s a simple observation: Taxing income is the stupidest possible thing to tax–and the most unjust, too. Nobody owes you anything because they earned income for themselves. Meanwhile, taxing income discourages companies from hiring unemployed people by artificially inflating the cost of putting them on the payroll. It’s not enough to pay them their take home pay, you have to pay them enough for their income taxes, too? For unskilled workers, who by definition can’t compete on anything put the price of their labor, that is an unfair burden. Taxing anything else would be better.

    1. I am pretty sure Neil Peart repudiated the foolish ideas of his youth.

      1. I can’t see the citation

  9. The lesson is that I need to hire Trump’s accountant to do my taxes.

    1. You have poor judgment.

      1. And you have a significant intellectual deficiency.

      2. Why? Seriously.

        1. You got to be kidding.
          That’s some pimply adolescent taking time off from face-gram and gaming to make an ass of himself here.
          You expect a serious answer?

          1. Having a 13yo son on the social media, I can vouch that there are indeed kids that barely have enough hair to cover up their sack or slit are taking part in political conversations and/or taking part in culture as if they have any fucking clue at all. These little fucksticks don’t know shit about shit, yet flap their fucking gums anyway. Makes me want to choke a bitch.

      3. “You have poor judgment.”

        Fuck off and die, lefty shit.

    2. you actually would need to switch to an asset heavy source of income.

    3. You better hire Trump’s accountant fast, before he either ends up in jail or tries to kill himself, like his personal attorney, chief strategist, and campaign manager.

      1. I’d suggest you DON’T seek help. You’re delusions stand a good chance of causing an early death, for which the adults of the world would cheer.

        1. Not sure I would call any Trump support an unqualified adult.

          1. Same goes for any Democratic supporter.

  10. This will be largely forgotten as an issue because it’s a month out and everybody had made up their mind. And anyway it’s the fucking NYT so why would anyone except extreme left wing partisans think they would tell the truth, or not spin it so badly.

    Based on responses here and elsewhere though you can tell nobody bothered to read it.

    1. I’m interested on the gawker like case that may come of this. By law tax records are private, much like a sex tape was considered private despite a public figure. Don’t think this would be covered by public figure interest.

      Likewise apparently there is a federal law against publishing tax information of an individual, so wonder how it meshes with pentagon papers case.

      1. I’m looking at this as a leak, but not one with the intent of publicly disclosing something bad/illegal that the government has done (whistleblowing).

        This leak of T’s taxes was simply because some think it’s their right to know, which of course it isn’t. They WANT to know. There is no compelling public interest in leaking this other than quelling feels. And there’s no legal requirement that he release them because he’s president.

        I’m thinking there’s definitely a good chance charges are brought if they find the culprit, and I’m thinking they’re totally appropriate in this case. There may also be a case against the NYT for the same reason. They didn’t release documents of a whistleblower showing government malfeasance; they released legally mandated confidential information about a private individual as a means to smear him publicly. It’s no different than if they were to publish my tax records (or a version/summary of them).

        I don’t know that there’s protection for that. Clearly releasing those documents is a crime. I’m thinking that publishing them may well be one too.

    2. Based on responses here and elsewhere though you can tell nobody bothered to read it.

      I sure didn’t.

  11. How much does Trump pay in property taxes?

    1. Probably the same that I pay for my 3 bed/ 2 bath rancher in NJ.

      1. That’s highly unlikely.

        Just in Los Angeles, between state and county property taxes, you’re paying millions in taxes on a decent sized office building. And, no, you can’t deduct expenses from property taxes.

        Regardless of whether Trump is paying nothing in personal income taxes, he’s paying millions in property taxes alone–nevermind taxes on the profits of the corporations he owns.

        1. I see we’ve decided to take obviously humorous statements seriously today.

            1. I invoke “you’re a humorless aspie cunt”

              1. I thought all libertarians were Aspies…?

    2. Far too much on improvements, not nearly enough on land values.

  12. I think calling the NYT story fake is mostly fair:
    1) NYT story (and Matt Welsh) acts like having a number of loans coming due in the next few years is some kind of shocking smoking gun proving he’s bankrupt and about to fold. In reality, it’s standard for commercial loans to come with 5, 7, 10 year due dates. The expectation is the loans will be refinanced before the due dates, provided business is reasonably creditworthy. I’ve been in 3 commercial loan deals and they all had due dates in the 5-10 year range.
    2) NYT story totally fails to differentiate between taxable income/loss and cash flow. NYT writing is actually pretty careless around this point and often seems as if the writer believes tax losses and negative cash flow is the same thing. In reality, it’s pretty normal to run a tax loss in real estate investing WHILE producing healthy cash flows. In my first 3 years in multifamily residential I ran tax losses while flowing cash nearly every month.
    3) NYT handwaves away depreciation as “a real expense because you did pay cash for those assets, so you’re recognizing their cost over time”. My buddy bought a house south of Seattle for $290K in 2014. It’s estimated to net a $500K sale price by redfin/zillow now. If I had bought his house in 2014 as a rental, I would by now have taken about $50K in depreciation expense, a totally non cash expense. And I would have $200K in unrealized capital gains on that property. Effectively all real estate investing works that way with regards to depreciation expense.

    1. I can forgive Welch and company for not knowing anything about real estate or taxes. They don’t know much period and it is hard to expect them to know this. What I can’t forgive is their refusal to understand how little they know and to even try and learn what the hell they are talking about before saying anything.

      1. The thing that kills me is, depending on how you want to look at it, they’ve had between 4 yrs. and 24 hrs. to conceptualize how to do this business.

        Any time in the past 4 yrs., they could’ve gotten any number of real estate investors, even ones opposed to Trump, to pen a cliff notes version of how the business works and how Trump is/would be likely to be “getting away with something”. If only as a minimal mask to cover their own stupidity. Instead, they woke up hungover on a Monday and decided it was time (once again) to play armchair QB.

        I’m pretty sure it’s a reflection of how they “passed” the harder classes in their respective journalism programs.

        1. Any time in the past 4 yrs., they could’ve gotten any number of real estate investors… to pen a cliff notes version of… how Trump is/would be likely to be “getting away with something”. If only as a minimal mask to cover their own stupidity. Instead, they woke up hungover on a Monday and decided it was time (once again) to play armchair QB.

          It’s because none of them took the allegations seriously.
          They knew it was all demagogic puffery and cheap invective, but they’re playing along anyway because clique affiliation and social signaling trumps doing their jobs.

          This is why everyone hates journalists.


    Diversity is our strength or something. Hey, they have a right to invade a country and attack any woman wearing a skirt. Sacred Muslims get to do that. The Libertarian moment man.

    1. White supremacy

    2. Although this story, if true, is certainly tragic, it must ABSOLUTELY NOT be weaponized to argue against the Koch / Reason open borders agenda.


    3. Was it the BBC, or the original French report, that decided to omit any description of the attackers beyond, “men?”

      Going to be interesting when they or the Russians become the first majority Muslim country with a real nuclear arsenal. Demographics say it’s coming, and soon.

      (Pakistan doesn’t count. Their arsenal exists exactly as long as either the Russians, Chinese, or US says it does.)

    4. Hey hey hey now John, the article said nothing about the racial or cultural inclination of these fellas. They were just as likely, if not more likely Trump supporters.

      /White Knight logic

  14. “That hasn’t stopped people from discussing Trump’s inventive accounting,’
    It is not Trump, it is his tax lawyers doing the accounting. He pays them to minimize his taxes. Everyone of us tries to pay the least taxes possible, why should he be different? Unless that accounting is false or illegal, there should not be a problem.
    If you figure your taxes out to pay the MOST in taxes possible. Please sound off in this forum. We would all like to hear why.

  15. “I came here to pwn libs and pay taxes on my income, and I’m all out of income.” – DJT

  16. Maybe Trump should issue an executive order releasing the tax forms of everyone in government and putting them online. That includes the spouses too. I noticed Feinstein and Pelosi list their assets separate from their husbands. Things that make you go hmmmm?

    1. I noticed Feinstein and Pelosi list their assets separate from their husbands. Things that make you go hmmmm?


    2. He should ask China, they already got everything from the OMB when Obama was in office.

  17. Police Confiscated Brad Parscale’s Guns After His Wife Alleged Abuse

    The former Trump campaign manager was arrested Sunday following a standoff with police.

    I noticed several large sized contusions on both of her arms, her cheek and forehead,” Detective Steven Smith wrote in his report, according to the Miami Herald. “When I asked how she received the bruising, [she] stated Brad Parscale hits her.”

    1. This doesn’t seem related to taxes.

      1. The tax thing isn’t what Stazele’s bosses had hoped so they’re pushing Parscale now.

        But wait a sec…

        “and had 10 guns inside his home that were seized by Florida police”
        Cripes Strazele! A former employee of Trump had ten whole guns and hit his wife? I didn’t know… Ten guns too many, huh.

        WTF, I hate Trump now.

      2. That’s a pimply-faced adolescent taking time off from face-gram to make an ass of himself here.

    2. So you’re saying Trump was right to fire him.

  18. This is all such a non-story, but the media dances to trample the people.

    Did yall know Azerbaijan and Armenia are at war?
    Like declared war, with artillery, tanks, casualties, and all. Started Saturday night/morning Sunday.
    As of a few hours ago, 84 confirmed KIA by Armenia. Azerbaijan has received “volunteer” forces from Turkey.
    Haven’t heard or seen a word about it from western media.

    1. The 84 confirmed Armenian KIA was as of a few hours ago.

    2. Azerbaijan and Armenia war recent news

      Google hits? About 37,200,000 results (0.74 seconds)

      It is ALL OVER the news, ax-grinding liar!

      1. Fuck off, Sqrlsy.

      2. Right that’s a search, fuckwit.

        1. You really didn’t expect a spastic to make those sorts of distinctions, did you?

    3. Yeah. Started yesterday. Al Jazeera is covering it well, including the massive amount of shit-talking that the official Twitter account of Armenia’s been putting out. Including lots of missile and bomb footage.

      These guys have been fighting over Nagorno-Karabahk/Arkash since the beginning of time. Weirdly, this is a Muzzie/Christian fight where the US’ll likely make nicer with the Azeris. Very secular, big O&G producer, if not global exporter. Which is what this fight is likely over. Glendale, CA hardest hit…

      Wake me when we start getting division sized elements rolling through Yerevan or Baku.

      1. And that sound you heard was a ton of old US Army O-4s through O-7s getting PTSD from thinking about their GAAT training exercises at one of the War Colleges. I guess it was a popular staff exercise, like Pineland is for newbie SF.

    4. You aren’t looking then. CNN. 11 PM Sunday. They beat you! Of course, if FOX is your network of choice, you wouldn’t know.

      1. CNN. 11 PM Sunday

        Poor guy, you must’ve been stuck at the airport.

        1. Naah. You’re not crediting his fucking imbecility.

      2. that talks of escalating tensions, not shots fired. Did you bother reading it?

      3. Yeah, I loved their coverage of Turkey and Greece nearly going to war 2 months ago, only to be averted by French intervention.

        But you didn’t see or hear any of that on CNN.

    5. It was on the front page of google news.

  19. What a joke. Here’s the issue at hand right now. Exactly now. Every American should understand that a Trump owes about $420M, which is due about 2 to 4 years from now. This means that if he wins another 4 years, this country and its policies will be for sale.

    That this needs to be explained to Libertarians is astonishing. The man is a con man. He didn’t release his tax returns because a con man couldn’t. He didn’t divest himself from holdings once he was President because a con man wouldn’t.

    In the next 4 years he will be interested in one thing, and one thing only…how much money is in it for me. He’s already played that role. It’s about to get worse.

    But you’ve made excuses for him for four years. You’re all doing it again. Patsies.

    1. Another winner of a leftie who doesn’t understand corporate structuring of asset backed loans. Congrats? Did journolist push this talking point of loans due?

      1. The patsies arrive!

        1. Speaking of patsies, where did you get the $420 million figure.

          1. Here’s what’s funny, patsy three…from the Times outstanding reporting (heck, you loved the Times outstanding reporting when they broke…yes they did…Hillary’s server story- see Michael Schmidt). But I’ll tell you…Trump can clear it all up, right? And prove you aren’t a patsy. Release his tax returns like every President since the 70s. Oh that’s right…you love that. When it’s your guy who does the conning.

            Libertarians. Selective about liberty.

            1. Still not seeing the calculations that say that Trump owes $420 million, “Ace”.

              1. It’s from his own tax returns the Times analyzed. Oh that’s right, you’ll just wait for Trump to release them. Kinda like when Trump demanded Obama release his birth certificate. He did. Maybe Trump will do so on taxes, eh? Nah…you’ll just take a liar and con mans word.


                1. You don’t understand how his company isn’t going to have to shell out $420 million, because you don’t understand taxable income/loss and cash flow and you don’t seem to understand that commercial loans are almost always refinanced before they come due.

                  You proved this in the other thread and now you’re proving it here.

              2. And by the way, mommy dear, in your infinite wisdom why do you think anyone getting security clearance has to reveal debts, eh? It’s because anyone with large debts is possibly available to be bought. To make decisions based on money gained. So what do you think, $420M would hit the threshold? But don’t worry, Trump will insist you and his supporters here aren’t really patsies and prove it by releasing his tax returns.

                1. and his assets?

                  You ran the last time i asked you

                2. you’ve never had a security clearance. As long as you report it and have assets to cover it isnt an issue dumbfuck.

            2. Liberty?

              It’s a tree that needs watering with your blood.

      2. EVERYONE who does NOT agree with JesseSPAZ is a leftie, and a Marxist! Way to win friends and influence people, JesseSPAZ!

        1. youre not even trying anymore buddy.

    2. lmao!!! What-the-F does trumps company budget have to do with ‘this country’?!?! Holy cow…. You people belong in an insane-asylum.

      1. Patsy #2. I know there’s more.

        1. Answer the fucking question, Buttplug.

          1. Enjoy your evening!

            1. Answer the fucking question.

              1. Why should he? Confirmation bias means that fossilized minds will NEVER change! They are too proud to EVER admit ignorance or error!

                1. “Why should he?”

                  To prove you can and to support your argument dummy lololo

                    1. sperging “patsy” everywhere for answering a question you asked lololol

                    2. My son is an idiot.

                    3. It’s all he can do, Tulpa.

                      He doesn’t understand business or finance, so this is what he’s left with. Screaming “patsy” at those who understand what they’re talking about.

                    4. So you came back after saying good evening and still didn’t answer the question?

      2. Trump personally owes over 400 million. That’s a huge security risk for the country.

        1. idiots keep saying this. Idiots can’t say what the asset side of the ledger is. Idiots gonna idiot.

        2. The biggest security to this country is the leftist hive mind, and its shills.

        3. so, no tax cheating then?
          no evidence of Russian bribes then?
          gotta scare people cause his business has normal business loans?

    3. “Every American should understand that a Trump owes about $420M, which is due about 2 to 4 years from now. This means that if he wins another 4 years, this country and its policies will be for sale.”

      Great opportunity to educate yourself.

      The Debt/Equity ratio is the amount of outstanding liabilities for a company compared to the amount shareholder eq

      “The D/E ratio for companies in the real estate sector on average is approximately 352% (or 3.5:1). Real estate investment trusts (REITs) come in a little higher at around 366%, while real estate management companies have an average D/E at a lower 164%.

      1. And the biggest patsy of them all, Ken is in the house!

        1. And you’re wrong.

          1. Nope. I nailed it.

            1. Is calling people “patsy” your new way of evading a response when Ken and Jesse schooled you?
              Pretty pathetic, Plug.

              1. Just being precise. Not meant to be inflammatory. Just precision at work.

                1. Then you need to change your own screen name to “The consequences of drinking during pregnancy” to be consistent

                2. You’re as precise as a anencephalic organizing their desk.

                3. “Just being precise. Not meant to be inflammatory. Just precision at work.”

                  The only time you’re precise is when you are precisely wrong.
                  BTW, shitstain, I’m still waiting to read what, specifically, we can do ‘addressing climate change’ and when those measures will have an effect on the CA wildfires.
                  You seem to have a hard time backing up your proggy prayers with anything other than bullshit in other threads.
                  Can we assume you are full of shit in general? I see no specificss here either, just ignorant whining regarding subjects of which you have zero knowledge.
                  Let’s make it short and sweet: The world will be much improved by your death; fuck off and die.

      2. That wasn’t supposed to post yet!

        . . . as I was saying.

        The Debt/Equity ratio is the amount of outstanding liabilities for a company compared to the amount shareholder equity in the company. Before the coronavirus, the average debt to equity ratio for a company in the S&P 500 was about .14.

        It’s much higher in real estate because of the nature of the business. You want to use other people’s money to buy assets–and the revenue streams commercial real estate generates, especially in thriving metropolitan areas with blue chip tenants in your office buildings or in highly desirable residential areas.

        Commercial leases are typically for three to five years. Large corporate clients are typically for ten years. Real estate companies may not even hold these properties for that long. They’re typically buying partially unleased buildings, leasing them up, and then selling them for a multiple of their NOI. When I was crunching numbers for a commercial real estate investment company, we typically didn’t hold a building for more than five years. That’s just dead weight over long periods of time which plays havoc with your IRR.

        Anyway, like I said, the D/E ratio for commercial real estate is much higher than the S&P 500.

        ““The D/E ratio for companies in the real estate sector on average is approximately 352% (or 3.5:1). Real estate investment trusts (REITs) come in a little higher at around 366%, while real estate management companies have an average D/E at a lower 164%.”

        Educate yourself on this, and you will suck less in the future.

        1. P.S. Here’s the data showing the S&P 500 D/E ratio at about .14.

          If you knew what you were talking about, you wouldn’t look so foolish.

        2. Enjoy your evening, patsy!

          1. I will.

            And please feel free to regurgitate some other uninformed non-issue. I’ll be happy to correct that with facts, too.

            But you know, there is this thing called a search engine, and you could double check that the stupid shit you post isn’t stupid before you post it–with a little bit of effort.

            Do you just not care whether people think you’re ridiculous and stupid?

            1. Ha! One person’s opinion for sure I couldn’t care less about is yours. You’re a proven patsy for a con man. That you think debt to equity ratio has anything to do with the money grabs Trump has engaged in his WHOLE life tells everyone about your level of critical thinking. Calling you and the others here a patsy is just being precise.
              But hey, you and the rest of the phony libertarians here deserve him! Enjoy!

              1. The fact that the D/E ratio for companies in the real estate industry is much higher than it is in other companies isn’t my opinion, you buffoon. And that you were apparently ignorant of this isn’t just my opinion either. I can see it right there:


                You have no idea what you’re talking about–and you’re so sure of yourself!

                It’s kinda funny.

                1. It’s Buttplug.
                  His “patsy” shtick is his new trick for evading an intelligent retort.

                  1. Awww. Feelings hurt?

                    1. Yes, your ex Patsie broke you forever that hussy!

                    2. Yeah I love how upset uou get when we remind everyone why you got banned screech.

                      Your feelings get hurt as fuck lolol

                  2. Pretty sure this isn’t turd. This pathetic piece of lefty shit posted here for quite a while and disappeared entirely after predicting that the hag would win in ’16, and also (from memory) making some asinine predictions regarding climate change.
                    S/he’s showed up again, hoping to use the bloody shirt of the CA wildfires to promote his/her religion, and is, as s/he was, no better at explaining what we should do and why.
                    Run of the mill lefty fucking ignoramus; treat as such; beat the asshole into the ground.

                    1. I’ll remain unconvinced; the world is not lacking for other lefty ‘tards, and I’m not seeing the turd ‘tells’ here.

                2. And why do you think I started my first comment with “what a joke,” genius? I called out those above for their constant excusing of this con man. Debt to equity ratio? Really. Don’t make me laugh.

                  Here’s the lesson you, Nick, Ronald, and all the other patsies here just hide from. Trump is a con man. Period. He’s been that since he was in business, and lost, and lost, and lost, and bankrupted and bankrupted and bankrupted. But he’s always been able to find the next sucker…like Deutsche Bank, and finally you and the phony libertarians here.

                  And now he wants you to give him 4 more years to steal from you more than he has, and you’re going to say “Please sir, can I have some more?”

                  Too bad you weren’t heading a bank in New York when nearly all rejected him and he had to go overseas. He would have loved you.

                  Stop embarrassing yourself. It’s so hard to take any of you seriously anymore, including those on the podcast. Patsies.

                  1. Piss off you whiny fucking bitch. Stop shitting all over yourself and be a man.

                    1. Tough guy, eh?

                    2. he’s tougher than you and I know.

                      Now come to bed you need your butt rash ointment you’re getting cranky.

                    3. “Tough guy, eh?”

                      Piles of lefty shits like you assume it’s physical; fucking lefty thugs are like that.

                  2. “I called out those above for their constant excusing of this con man”



                    1. All you’ve done is proven yourself ignorant of basic corporate economics. That is all you’ve done here.

                  3. Jackand Ace
                    September.28.2020 at 9:16 pm
                    “And why do you think I started my first comment with “what a joke,” genius?…”

                    Because you’re a fucking ignoramus.

                  4. the joke is your ignorance. Many here are trying to educate you dumbfucks with basic corporate economics and you keel doubling down on dumb shit.

                    1. “the joke is your ignorance. Many here are trying to educate you dumbfucks with basic corporate economics and you keel doubling down on dumb shit.”

                      Not for free; $650/hr for a dumbass who can’t even spell Jackass correctly.

                  5. “Here’s the lesson you, Nick, Ronald, and all the other patsies here just hide from. Trump is a con man. Period. He’s been that since he was in business, and lost, and lost, and lost, and bankrupted and bankrupted and bankrupted. But he’s always been able to find the next sucker…like Deutsche Bank, and finally you and the phony libertarians here.”

                    Hey, jackass? What’s your net worth, you pathetic piece of lefty shit? I’m gonna guess you really haven’t yet covered the deposit on the the double-wide you live in.:

                    “As of September 2020, Donald Trump has an estimated net worth of around $4 billion. He made his billion-dollar empire as a businessman and succeeded his father. He also earned handsomely when he worked for television. His annual salary was $60 million for his show ‘The Celebrity Apprentice’.”

              2. Jackand Ace
                September.28.2020 at 8:36 pm
                “Ha! One person’s opinion for sure I couldn’t care less about is yours…”

                The ‘opinion’ of a fucking lefty ignoramus is NWS.

              3. Palin thinks facts listed by Ken are opinion…

          2. Man, do you always run away when you learn information you were ignorant about Palin?

    4. “…Every American should understand that a Trump owes about $420M, which is due about 2 to 4 years from now…”

      For reasons of her own, wife is currently yelling at one of the news broadcasts featuring Pelosi claiming that Trump is some national security risk since ‘he personally owes $4CM!!!”
      Now, Pelosi actually owns some businesses, even if she never really dirties her hands by doing anything, sso we know she is flat-out lying and playing to her fucking lefty ignoramus TDS base.
      Which base would be jackass here.
      No, you pathetic piece of lefty shit; you been trolled. If you want to know what the true arrangements are and why there is minimal danger, I bill fucking lefty ignoramuses like you $650/hour to educate you, since you are so fucking stupid.

  20. Oh, and OT: if you were thinking of visiting Houston, the idiot mayor just enacted a ‘cite and release’ campaign for petty crime. Like similar programs in Dallas and Austin. Petty crime here being graffiti under 2500 bucks in damage, theft under 750, and other crimes.

    I’m certainly going to enjoy the heightened risk of having my car broken into until I can leave this shithole. Because it ain’t changing, anytime soon.

    1. Cops across the country are reluctant to do anything they don’t have to do right now anyway. The mob is just sitting around waiting for another outrage to happen. The mayor just be making it official.

  21. Just out of curiosity, does anybody have any ideas about where I could make $85 an hour working from home? And if you have a link, that would be great.

    1. $85 an hour

      What’s that in buckets?

    2. You should check out the internet. It’s full of money making opportunities.

    3. Not as a paid leftist troll. I think they only get paid in BidenBucks

  22. That hasn’t stopped people from discussing Trump’s inventive accounting, to a chorus of sputtered outrage by Trump’s legion of critics, the vast majority of whom miss a simple point: The tax code is a big, complicated mess because major-party politicians—including those Republicans who insincerely promise to fit the entire form “on a postcard”—like it just fine that way, and voters do not punish them for perennially exacerbating the exasperating status quo.
    All Awesome Pictures For Love Hearts

    1. This bot reads like Chemjeff

  23. ✧✧✧✧Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $9564 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…Visit here to earn !!!!

    1. How come you didn’t tell me about this up top, Diana? This is exactly the kind of thing I’ve been looking for! Thank you.

  24. Trump’s inventive accounting

    I’m sure Trump would be happy to tell you he does his own taxes because nobody knows more about taxes than he does, but he would be lying just as much as he lies about how he’s the world’s greatest everything else. It ain’t Trump that came up with the “inventive accounting” and it probably wasn’t some shyster like Michael Cohen, I suspect tax accounting is one area Trump doesn’t skimp on.

    1. And TDS is something jerry don’t scrimp on, right jerry?


    Trump Just Lost Control of the Game
    His tax returns dispel all his pretensions to wealth and sacrifice, and his reelection campaign is running out of time.

    LOSER is now going to LOSE!

    1. Oh, goody! An opinion piece from other TDS twits posted by the spastic!

      1. Refute what the article says (with many Trump quotes included in the article)? You can NOT, can you, intellectual pansy, candy-ass whiner-crybaby?

        1. Refute? What? The links to other Atlantic articles or the Anti-Trump book the author wrote that he also links to or just the foundation-less emotional spats of the author which have no basis to be refuted at all?

          First part of article, Trump pays no taxes, second part, well “income taxes” anyways, third part, Trump pays terrible taxes to over-sea’s businesses.

          Huh??? WTF?? I thought he paid no taxes, oh, whoops I guess income taxes, oh whoops I guess there was tax but hate him anyways because he paid taxes in Turkey and what’s this; charity donations as a write-off???

          It floors me how any person has the ability to take heart in such emotional opinion-sharing drivel.

  26. I thought the common people are the power of America and Trump is the president so they both have to find the mid-solution for this tax rule.

    1. Uh, what?
      Oops; name-link, busted.

      1. You are right what you think pension is also and concern regarding these changes.

  27. PaperAds4U is a best website for advertisement and informations about government and private Jobs.

  28. I have an even simpler and fairer tax system (assuming we need one, of which I’m not convinced):

    1. Take total federal spending planned for the following year.
    2. Divide by the number of adults (18+) living in the USA.
    3. Send everyone the same bill.

    Congress plans to spend 5 trillion dollars.
    There are 250 million adults in the USA.
    Everyone owes 20 grand for that year.

    That might make spending hikes and bailouts a bit tougher to pass. Plus you wouldn’t have to document anything, just send the check.

    1. Why shouldn’t parents also pay for their children?

      Massive chunks of tax money are thrown around in their name.

      1. “Why shouldn’t parents also pay for their children?” – They should. It’s part of the “responsibility” they receive for having children.

        But being termed a “child” for 18-years is bad enough – the lefty goal post for the left is terming all human’s as “children of the state” for all eternity in an attempt to have full gov-dictatorship.

        Isn’t it about time to “allow” growing human’s to “grow-up”. The one’s “allowed” and desire to grow-up can usually sustain themselves at the age of 8 or less. Why must the world ‘collectively’ dictate and enforce the “least common denominator” always (someone-else’s excellent words)…

        Do we really want to frame legislature to expect everyone to be just as useless as the least useful among-st us.

  29. I wonder if Obama or Hilary had a financial situation like Trump what the inbred Trump ass kissers would be saying?
    I’m not even gonna make a judgement on his finances because I’m not an accountant or financial expert. I know I pay less taxes when my investments lose money.

    I didn’t call the whole thing left wing bs or fake news. I must have TDS!?!
    If I’m completely unwilling to say everything Trump does is right and his critics are wrong I have TDS!
    Goddamn I hate right wing, inbred, rednecks.

    1. ^Hey look; more fantasy claims… I starting to think it’s a given that the only thing anti-Trumpers hate about Trump supporters is items they can make-up in their own delusional fantasy land.

      I for one don’t give a rats-ass about Obama’s or Hillary’s personal finances. Obama bankrupted the nation, violates the Constitution compulsively and loves to dictate and Hillary just promises more of the same; that’s all I need to know

  30. I have made 96,760 Buck just last month by working online from my home. I am a full time college student and just doing this in my free time for few hours per week by using my laptop.Everyone can check this out and start making cash online in a very easy way by just following instructions…….  Read More   

  31. What does the IRS think of the tax returns. If there was something up wouldn’t they audit? I would bet Trump gest audited every year

  32. To quote my late mother, about people who want to see Mr. Tump’s returns, “It’s none of your damn business.”

    She believed the public is only entitled to see the returns of those charged with tax evasion, or those whose returns conceal improper sources of income (claiming none of your income came from drug dealing or selling goods to the Iranians or North Koreans). Or, if it’s determined that some of your income came from bribes or self dealing.

    If you remember, Al Gore’s tax returns showed charitable contributions of roughly $600, while having income in the millions from the Gore family trust.

    All that did, in my mother’s opinion was made out Gore to be an Ebenezer Scrooge, before the spirits visited him.

  33. hello, thank you for the post

  34. Thanks admin for giving such valuable information through your article . Your article is much more similar to word unscramble tool because it also provides a lot of knowledge of vocabulary new words with its meanings.

  35. Hello idk why Trump refuses this at that time I read the same on and I thought Trump has the different thought process regarding this time.

  36. Money Subsidiary provides the latest Indian stock market news and Live NSE/BSE Sensex & Nifty Charts updates. Get the information related to Bank, Finance Portfolio Investment/Management, Find the relevant updates regarding Buy & Sell. And Beginners guide to investing in stocks.

Please to post comments