U.S Presidential Election | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

U.S Presidential Election

Giardiasis

Tiger Legend
Apr 20, 2009
6,906
1,313
Brisbane
Sintiger said:
My only point was related to paying taxes on earnings of investments.

Not sure why it's relevant really. If making money was the prerequisite to being a leader then Bill Gates should be US President and Gina Rinehart our PM.
Yeah, I was just providing some further info that made the point moot.
 

Rosy

Tiger Legend
Mar 27, 2003
54,347
9
Trump scares me. Clinton annoys me. I'm sick of over the top Yankee accents and grandstanding. Theatre personified. Pity it's so important on the world grand style.
 

1eyedtiger

Tiger Superstar
Jun 2, 2007
1,132
1
Why are people so concerned with the amount of tax Trump has paid? It may not be moral but as long as he works within the law. The laws were proposed, debated and passed by career politicians like Clinton. If it's so bad, why did the career politicians word the tax laws the way they did? Now who are the crooks?
 

tigersnake

Tear 'em apart
Sep 10, 2003
21,492
7,200
1eyedtiger said:
Why are people so concerned with the amount of tax Trump has paid? It may not be moral but as long as he works within the law. The laws were proposed, debated and passed by career politicians like Clinton. If it's so bad, why did the career politicians word the tax laws the way they did? Now who are the crooks?

In my view, call it old-fashioned and idealistic, a leader should have a strong sense of civic duty. Part of that would be paying the intended or right amount of tax, rather than a what-in-it-for-me modus operandi and exploit loopholes to avoid tax.
 

poppa x

Tiger Legend
May 28, 2004
5,552
0
Mt Waverley
Why are people so concerned with the amount of tax Trump has paid?

It's simple.
Paying no tax for 10 years means his businesses have lost money for 10 years.
So - do we need a loss making businessman as President?
If he can't run his business at a profit then how can manage a trillion dollar budget?
 

1eyedtiger

Tiger Superstar
Jun 2, 2007
1,132
1
Not paying tax doesn't mean his businesses have made a loss. It just means they have been able to reduce their tax bill to zero.
And anyway, I can't see him being any worse at managing trillion dollar budgets than 'career politicians' who have very little idea about anything at all.

Who do you think is capable of managing trillion dollar budgets? I'll bet the average person on the street battling to put a roof over their head and food on the table would be better at managing trillion dollar budgets than 'career politicians' who have absolutely no idea what the dollar is worth and no accountability when they lose billions because of poor decision making. After all, it's not their money.
 

tigertim

something funny is written here
Mar 6, 2004
27,710
8,466
I agree with the Kerry Packer mantra when it comes to minimising tax.
 

1eyedtiger

Tiger Superstar
Jun 2, 2007
1,132
1
I think that everyone has a moral obligation to tax a fair amount of taxation based on income. How else is society to function and provide infrastructure and services?

But my point here is that the businessman is avoiding paying tax using loopholes made by career politicians. So, the likes of Clinton and their supporters have no right to make any sort of judgement about the likes of Trump when they themselves enabled this to happen.
 

Willo

Tiger Legend
Oct 13, 2007
16,833
4,086
Aldinga Beach
Plenty of muckraking going both ways.
The "Clinton Crime Family" ;D
Bill and Hilary left the Whitehouse "flat broke" now their Clinton Foundation worth over $180 million :eek:
All Chelsea's living expenses and even her wedding were paid for by the Foundation. Supposedly ::)
Bigger story about her email account
Crickey what setup. She'll probably get voted in as POTUS then get the arse
 

Giardiasis

Tiger Legend
Apr 20, 2009
6,906
1,313
Brisbane
1eyedtiger said:
I think that everyone has a moral obligation to tax a fair amount of taxation based on income. How else is society to function and provide infrastructure and services?
You have a pretty twisted idea of morality if you consider it immoral to avoid paying someone that is holding a gun to your head. You don't need a monopoly on violence for society to function, and you certainly don't need it to provide infrastructure and services.
 

AngryAnt

Tiger Legend
Nov 25, 2004
25,844
12,738
1eyedtiger said:
But my point here is that the businessman is avoiding paying tax using loopholes made by career politicians. So, the likes of Clinton and their supporters have no right to make any sort of judgement about the likes of Trump when they themselves enabled this to happen.

Well that would depend on what measures they took and what legislation they supported to change the tax regime eh 1eyed? Hillary was a single senator - it's unreasonable to expect her to be able to change legislation on her own. Too simplistic to say "she is a politician, therefore she is responsible for the current state of the nation".
 

AngryAnt

Tiger Legend
Nov 25, 2004
25,844
12,738
willo said:
Plenty of muckraking going both ways.
The "Clinton Crime Family" ;D
Bill and Hilary left the Whitehouse "flat broke" now their Clinton Foundation worth over $180 million :eek:
All Chelsea's living expenses and even her wedding were paid for by the Foundation. Supposedly ::)

I'm assuming you have a source for these allegations apart from the usual clickbait alt-right BS sites Willo?

EDIT Here you go - the Clintons get NO direct financial benefit from the Clinton foundation. They get no salary or other tangible material benefits. They do get indirect benefits - mainly publicity.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2016/sep/01/hilary-rosen/democrat-pundit-clintons-get-no-personal-benefit-f/

As I said, this is just another facet of the BS far right campaign to say anything about the Clintons - they know most people are too dumb to check or question it.
 

Baloo

Delisted Free Agent
Nov 8, 2005
42,360
15,371
antman said:
Well that would depend on what measures they took and what legislation they supported to change the tax regime eh 1eyed? Hillary was a single senator - it's unreasonable to expect her to be able to change legislation on her own. Too simplistic to say "she is a politician, therefore she is responsible for the current state of the nation".

Being who she is if she really wanted to change this she would have been very vocal about it.

A bit like the gun laws. Not may of them stand up and fight the fight too hard. As they are the only ones who can change the law, sitting on their hands is as good as condoning the current laws.
 

Willo

Tiger Legend
Oct 13, 2007
16,833
4,086
Aldinga Beach
antman said:
I'm assuming you have a source for these allegations apart from the usual clickbait alt-right BS sites Willo?

EDIT Here you go - the Clintons get NO direct financial benefit from the Clinton foundation. They get no salary or other tangible material benefits. They do get indirect benefits - mainly publicity.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2016/sep/01/hilary-rosen/democrat-pundit-clintons-get-no-personal-benefit-f/

As I said, this is just another facet of the BS far right campaign to say anything about the Clintons - they know most people are too dumb to check or question it.
http://nypost.com/2016/11/06/chelsea-clinton-used-foundation-to-help-pay-for-wedding-emails/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/foreign-governments-gave-millions-to-foundation-while-clinton-was-at-state-dept/2015/02/25/31937c1e-bc3f-11e4-8668-4e7ba8439ca6_story.html
http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/clinton-foundation-scandal/

Plenty of clickbait out there. With good reason.
 

AngryAnt

Tiger Legend
Nov 25, 2004
25,844
12,738
Band said the pal revealed that Chelsea had told one of George W. Bush’s daughters that she was looking into transfers of money from the Clinton Global Initiative to the Clinton Foundation.

“The bush kid then told someone else who told an operative within the republican party,” Band wrote

http://nypost.com/2016/11/06/chelsea-clinton-used-foundation-to-help-pay-for-wedding-emails/

You know the New York Post is clickbait tripe right willo? But I'm sure we can trust the veracity - someone's "pal" told GWB's daughter something. The Bush kid then told a "Republican Party operative". Sounds definitive to me.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/foreign-governments-gave-millions-to-foundation-while-clinton-was-at-state-dept/2015/02/25/31937c1e-bc3f-11e4-8668-4e7ba8439ca6_story.html

Interesting in terms of possible influence while Hilary was Sec. Of State, but says nothing about any personal gain for the Clintons.

http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/clinton-foundation-scandal/

This one says the same as the Washington Post, but more hysterically.

Try again.
 

AngryAnt

Tiger Legend
Nov 25, 2004
25,844
12,738
Baloo said:
Being who she is if she really wanted to change this she would have been very vocal about it.

A bit like the gun laws. Not may of them stand up and fight the fight too hard. As they are the only ones who can change the law, sitting on their hands is as good as condoning the current laws.

Yeah I went and looked at her voting record/position on tax reform and she didn't do a whole lot as a senator - tried to get the higher tax rate for top earners reinstated once without success. So your point stands.
 

Willo

Tiger Legend
Oct 13, 2007
16,833
4,086
Aldinga Beach
antman said:
You know the New York Post is clickbait tripe right willo? But I'm sure we can trust the veracity - someone's "pal" told GWB's daughter something. The Bush kid then told a "Republican Party operative". Sounds definitive to me.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/foreign-governments-gave-millions-to-foundation-while-clinton-was-at-state-dept/2015/02/25/31937c1e-bc3f-11e4-8668-4e7ba8439ca6_story.html

Interesting in terms of possible influence while Hilary was Sec. Of State, but says nothing about any personal gain for the Clintons.

http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/clinton-foundation-scandal/

This one says the same as the Washington Post, but more hysterically.

Try again.

I don't need to try anything. Go back to my original post and you will notice the disclaimer "supposedly" which means take it with a grain of whatever
Anything I put up you'll just brush off as clickbait tripe or far right hysteria or whatever. You asked foursome sources, I provided some.

Some may think Bill and Hilary are victims, there's plenty who would disagree. Me among them, they're a pair of sleaze bags of the highest order.
And no I don't hold Trump up as any paragon either.
 

Baloo

Delisted Free Agent
Nov 8, 2005
42,360
15,371
I still don't understand how the Republicans have managed to not only lose the election (I think) but also destroyed heir own party. All they needed was a semi-decent candidate and they would have romped it home such is the distrust of the Clintons.

The next election will be amusing.