|
Post by artgirl1 on Sept 16, 2017 20:12:03 GMT
That we, as country, can no longer have 61M out of 200M registered voters sit on the sidelines and not vote , regardless of their reasons. IMO, If you did not vote, you have lost any bargaining and negotiating ability to express an opinion. Not to decide is to decide. If you cannot make a decision for a vote of one candidate over the other, than you no longer have a right to defend, justify or criticize either candidate.
|
|
AnotherPea
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,968
Jan 4, 2015 1:47:52 GMT
|
Post by AnotherPea on Sept 16, 2017 20:38:07 GMT
I have to provide my tax return for much lesser aspirations. Why shouldn't someone who wants the most important job in the country have to? To whom? Do you have to make yours public knowledge?
|
|
|
Post by LiLi on Sept 16, 2017 20:58:35 GMT
I have to provide my tax return for much lesser aspirations. Why shouldn't someone who wants the most important job in the country have to? To whom? Do you have to make yours public knowledge? I have had to disclose to employers and or when purchasing a large item. Becoming a member of a club (and many non-official people have access to that info.) People who want to become police officers... etc Other public officials are required to also, why not the president? In the case of tge president, it isn't, "making it public." The president is an "employee" of the people.
|
|
PLurker
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,749
Location: Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Jun 28, 2014 3:48:49 GMT
|
Post by PLurker on Sept 16, 2017 21:19:54 GMT
I don't care whether he gives to charity or not. I do care whether he tells the truth about it. His claims could be easily verified with a look at his return. The left - the millions of us who want to see the returns - are far more interested in who he does business with and how he is planning to use the office to advance his personal wealth. His tax returns are the easiest way to see how he profits from decision during his presidency, if he does profit from them. In other words, if he isn't doing anything wrong, he wouldn't oppose releasing the returns. You know, Lisa, I believe every single thing you just posted-for YOU! But that is not true of the general left. There is not a thing Trump could do inluding find a cure for cancer that would be good in their eyes. If you look upthread, you will find a number of comments about people thinking they will find a Russia connection in those returns. That isn't going to happen. But what may happen is that we will discover that he is not a particularly generous giver. He knows what is in there and he knows what the press and the left will do with it. I don't think that (bolded) is true of general left. Extreme left- probably. I know it isn't for me but I am not the general left. I seem to be of the "general left" with this admin because of who I know him to be before, during and after the election-I personally think he is not a quality human being but hope for the best but don't expect it of him. That being said I have and will give credit when credit is due. I admit I am very skeptical of him as I think he does what is best for him, period- so any good/benefits to others are because they just happen to coincide with his wants/needs. Past discussions on here by those who claim to be or seem to be in the general left have done the same. Given credit (with skepticism) of good things that have come out of this administration. Few and far between is probably true because their politics don't jive. The one recent thread that comes to mind is his pledge of $1,000,000 for hurricane relief. It was applauded with skepticism-but that is of trumps making because of past unfulfilled pledges. I think it will be great, too, when/if the check(s) arrive. So I have to disagree. I think credit would be given but with (well deserved) skepticism.
|
|
|
Post by jenis40 on Sept 16, 2017 21:36:34 GMT
You know, Lisa, I believe every single thing you just posted-for YOU! But that is not true of the general left. There is not a thing Trump could do inluding find a cure for cancer that would be good in their eyes. If you look upthread, you will find a number of comments about people thinking they will find a Russia connection in those returns. That isn't going to happen. But what may happen is that we will discover that he is not a particularly generous giver. He knows what is in there and he knows what the press and the left will do with it. I don't think that (bolded) is true of general left. Extreme left- probably. I know it isn't for me but I am not the general left. I seem to be of the "general left" with this admin because of who I know him to be before, during and after the election-I personally think he is not a quality human being but hope for the best but don't expect it of him. That being said I have and will give credit when credit is due. I admit I am very skeptical of him as I think he does what is best for him, period- so any good/benefits to others are because they just happen to coincide with his wants/needs. Past discussions on here by those who claim to be or seem to be in the general left have done the same. Given credit (with skepticism) of good things that have come out of this administration. Few and far between is probably true because their politics don't jive. The one recent thread that comes to mind is his pledge of $1,000,000 for hurricane relief. It was applauded with skepticism-but that is of trumps making because of past unfulfilled pledges. I think it will be great, too, when/if the check(s) arrive. So I have to disagree. I think credit would be given but with (well deserved) skepticism. Expanding on this, if DACA makes it into law, i will give him credit for it. It won't be his alone but let's face it, without his support it won't make it into law. And while he's certainly not been perfect (there's been a few cringe worthy moments) I think he's handled the hurricane disasters ok. On topic, I don't understand why this law would be a big hurdle to entering the presidential race. Most candidates for the past 40 years have done this and it doesn't appear to have been an undue burden. Go California!
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Sept 16, 2017 21:58:09 GMT
I have to provide my tax return for much lesser aspirations. Why shouldn't someone who wants the most important job in the country have to? To whom? Do you have to make yours public knowledge? I have had to provide mine to banks, business interests, insurers. And why? To see if I was a risk. With that, it makes perfect sense to require a presidential candidate required to show his returns and other business interests. I'm not fully in agreement that they should be printed in the newspaper for all to see, but I think that it would be prudent to have someone--some agency review them.
|
|
|
Post by jenis40 on Sept 16, 2017 22:03:35 GMT
We would've caught his Russia ties. It's clearly too easy to lie on the financial disclosure documents, as witnessed by the fact that they've caught him doing so. It would also be easy to release returns that aren't the actual returns. Who's going to prove it isn't the actual return? The IRS can't say anything. The documents are confidential. If I had something on my return I didn't want anybody to see, I would just change it before I released it. We don't even know if all the prior released returns are they ones actually filed. While this isn't what Presidents have been providing, the IRS can provide a verification of what has been filed with them. I have requested them as part of my job before (I'm a Credit Analyst, commercial business loan underwriting). You need the actual tax return as well in order to make sense of the information. Regarding Tax Returns, I analyze them for a living. Most analysts and lenders prefer CPA prepared statements because they are more detailed but we always get tax returns as well, partially as verification of the numbers. Additionally, there can be a difference between the tax return income statements and CPA prepared statements. It mainly has to do with what you can claim as deductible expenses. I looked at the financial disclosures a while ago and as I recall, I thought there was some detail missing that would be provided by a tax return, particularly in regards to properties owned. Depending on how his LLC's file, you would also need those tax returns in order to get the whole picture. (single member LLC's can be filed on a 1040 personal tax return. If it's a partnership or unmarried multiple members (not husband and wife) it is filed on a 1065 or 1120-S.)
|
|
|
Post by Sharon on Sept 17, 2017 2:57:32 GMT
It would also be easy to release returns that aren't the actual returns. Who's going to prove it isn't the actual return? The IRS can't say anything. The documents are confidential. If I had something on my return I didn't want anybody to see, I would just change it before I released it. We don't even know if all the prior released returns are they ones actually filed. While this isn't what Presidents have been providing, the IRS can provide a verification of what has been filed with them. I have requested them as part of my job before (I'm a Credit Analyst, commercial business loan underwriting). You need the actual tax return as well in order to make sense of the information. Regarding Tax Returns, I analyze them for a living. Most analysts and lenders prefer CPA prepared statements because they are more detailed but we always get tax returns as well, partially as verification of the numbers. Additionally, there can be a difference between the tax return income statements and CPA prepared statements. It mainly has to do with what you can claim as deductible expenses. I looked at the financial disclosures a while ago and as I recall, I thought there was some detail missing that would be provided by a tax return, particularly in regards to properties owned. Depending on how his LLC's file, you would also need those tax returns in order to get the whole picture. (single member LLC's can be filed on a 1040 personal tax return. If it's a partnership or unmarried multiple members (not husband and wife) it is filed on a 1065 or 1120-S.) I am a CPA. I don't need your lecture!
|
|
|
Post by jenis40 on Sept 17, 2017 3:31:55 GMT
While this isn't what Presidents have been providing, the IRS can provide a verification of what has been filed with them. I have requested them as part of my job before (I'm a Credit Analyst, commercial business loan underwriting). You need the actual tax return as well in order to make sense of the information. Regarding Tax Returns, I analyze them for a living. Most analysts and lenders prefer CPA prepared statements because they are more detailed but we always get tax returns as well, partially as verification of the numbers. Additionally, there can be a difference between the tax return income statements and CPA prepared statements. It mainly has to do with what you can claim as deductible expenses. I looked at the financial disclosures a while ago and as I recall, I thought there was some detail missing that would be provided by a tax return, particularly in regards to properties owned. Depending on how his LLC's file, you would also need those tax returns in order to get the whole picture. (single member LLC's can be filed on a 1040 personal tax return. If it's a partnership or unmarried multiple members (not husband and wife) it is filed on a 1065 or 1120-S.) I am a CPA. I don't need your lecture! It wasn't intended as a lecture nor was 99% of my comment directed at you personally. I was just jumping off from your comment on whether or not the public would know if the tax returns were legitimate. Since you are a CPA, perhaps you could share some information with the rest of us regarding what information regarding foreign transactions could or couldn't be found in a tax return.
|
|
|
Post by vspindler on Sept 17, 2017 3:53:49 GMT
I am a CPA. I don't need your lecture! It wasn't intended as a lecture nor was 99% of my comment directed at you personally. I was just jumping off from your comment on whether or not the public would know if the tax returns were legitimate. Since you are a CPA, perhaps you could share some information with the rest of us regarding what information regarding foreign transactions could or couldn't be found in a tax return. His return could show a credit for foreign taxes paid and what countries (form 1116) or possibly certain ownership (more than 10%) in foreign corporations (form 5471). (Another CPA butting in lol)
|
|
|
Post by Sharon on Sept 17, 2017 14:16:47 GMT
It wasn't intended as a lecture nor was 99% of my comment directed at you personally. I was just jumping off from your comment on whether or not the public would know if the tax returns were legitimate. Since you are a CPA, perhaps you could share some information with the rest of us regarding what information regarding foreign transactions could or couldn't be found in a tax return. His return could show a credit for foreign taxes paid and what countries (form 1116) or possibly certain ownership (more than 10%) in foreign corporations (form 5471). (Another CPA butting in lol) There is also an information Form (Form 3520) for receipt of foreign gifts. It is not a tax return because no tax is owed on gifts. It could be argued this would never be released since it not a tax return. I still don't have any desire to see his return or any other candidate's return. It's private and confidential. All I want to know is that all taxes owed are paid. I don't care if they took advantage of tax deductions.....any citizen can do that.
|
|
cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,376
Jun 26, 2014 0:42:38 GMT
|
Post by cycworker on Sept 17, 2017 15:33:39 GMT
I can't stand Trump. If he ends up getting a deal done on DACA, knowing it is the one thing he could do that would alienate his base, because they oppose amnesty in any form, I'll give him credit. If he is willing to do the one thing that will make even Bannon turn on him, that's big.
I don't buy this notion that good people won't run because of tax returns, or scrutiny, or anything. I'm in local politics. Good people aren't motivated by mone, we are motivated by ideals. I'd work for free if I could. Heck I had an argument with our staff because I wanted to refuse a small raise and they wouldn't let me because it was too complicated to administer.
Anyway. Good people feel compelled to serve. We need to try to make the world a better place and leave things better than we found them. No amount of scrutiny or criticism or demands from the public will ever scare us off.
The problem isn't that we don't exist or that we don't run. It's that too many get sucked in by the more flashy types and we rarely get elected. And sometimes, if we do, we end up scapegoated by the bad guys, like a friend of mine has been (and like I have to an extent) because we do what's right, not what's popular.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Sept 17, 2017 15:42:20 GMT
Because I am a public school employee, my salary, licensure information (including censures, if I had any) and appraisal ratings are made public because, apparently, it's in the public's best interest to have that information - even though for private employees, this is all confidential stuff. I operate in a limited scope with a limited number of children.
But it's apparently too intrusive to ask our country's leader - whose decisions, including financial ones, affect all of us - to release his tax returns? Please. Tell me another one.
I know a lot of people who voted for Trump because they believed he was a smart and successful businessman, and that those skills would translate to his being a good president. I personally believe the reason he didn't release his returns is because they would show he isn't nearly as successful as he pretends to be. He might also have put off some of the working-class people who voted for him when they see that he likely pays a lower effective tax rate than they do and is eligible for a lot of deductions only available to the rich. And you know what? I think people voting for our nation's leader have a right to that information.
People here have told me that if I don't like having my personal information released, I should choose a different career. I would suggest that if someone isn't willing to be transparent with the American people about who they are financially, maybe the office of the presidency isn't a good fit for them.
|
|
twinsmomfla99
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,992
Jun 26, 2014 13:42:47 GMT
|
Post by twinsmomfla99 on Sept 17, 2017 16:23:38 GMT
His return could show a credit for foreign taxes paid and what countries (form 1116) or possibly certain ownership (more than 10%) in foreign corporations (form 5471). (Another CPA butting in lol) There is also an information Form (Form 3520) for receipt of foreign gifts. It is not a tax return because no tax is owed on gifts. It could be argued this would never be released since it not a tax return. I still don't have any desire to see his return or any other candidate's return. It's private and confidential. All I want to know is that all taxes owed are paid. I don't care if they took advantage of tax deductions.....any citizen can do that. Yes, any citizen can take advantage of tax deductions, but not all of us are influencing tax policy at the highest level. I believe we have a right to know whether or not the President is protecting his own self-interest when he pushes policy decisions. Instead of less tax information being made public, I would go so far as to suggest that MORE should be disclosed. How about we require tax returns from Congress as well?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 2, 2024 3:01:06 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2017 23:07:59 GMT
What did you think was going to happen when you make a statement like "there isn't a thinking American alive"? for the RECORD, she insulted EVERY American who doesn't think like her, there... I'm going to guess, though, that some or many of us on this thread have her on IGNORE, so we didn't SEE her insult. So thank you, @fred , for commenting on it so that I would see it. That was a pretty rude thing to say; I happen to believe Clinton is highly competent to be President of the United States, and I'll thank you to not speak for me in the future. ALso to not comment on my intellect in such a manner as to imply that I am a 'non-thinker' because I happen to believe she would be good at running the highest office in our country. How did one of the most kind and careful in her responses end up on ignore? I've never seen her be anything but thoughtful and kind and to be fair her comment is no different than those made when responding to Trump supporters.
|
|
|
Post by hop2 on Sept 19, 2017 23:17:15 GMT
I think it's a genius move, and I would expect other states to follow. ***eta*** I'll also be interesting to see if it holds up in court. NJ lawmakers tried and Christie squashed it
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 2, 2024 3:01:06 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2017 3:44:52 GMT
What did you think was going to happen when you make a statement like "there isn't a thinking American alive"? for the RECORD, she insulted EVERY American who doesn't think like her, there... I'm going to guess, though, that some or many of us on this thread have her on IGNORE, so we didn't SEE her insult. So thank you, @fred , for commenting on it so that I would see it. That was a pretty rude thing to say; I happen to believe Clinton is highly competent to be President of the United States, and I'll thank you to not speak for me in the future. ALso to not comment on my intellect in such a manner as to imply that I am a 'non-thinker' because I happen to believe she would be good at running the highest office in our country. How did one of the most kind and careful in her responses end up on ignore? I've never seen her be anything but thoughtful and kind and to be fair her comment is no different than those made when responding to Trump supporters.
|
|
|
Post by crittsmom on Sept 24, 2017 5:37:37 GMT
I live in California and they need to quit messing around with all of this crap and start working on what is really needed here - jobs, affordable housing, and keep the criminals in jail. I'm sick and tired of idiots that supposedly run this state, and no I didn't vote for them. The illegal immigrants are the majority and the State of California pays more attention to them then the citizens and legal immigrants already here. I don't care if Trump doesn't declare his taxes, California needs to fix what is in their own backyards and not go looking for trouble.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 2, 2024 3:01:05 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2017 14:15:53 GMT
Actually, California is doing quite well: "From early 2012 through mid-2016, the Golden State added jobs at about twice the rate of the U.S., often exceeding 3 percent year-over-year growth, the report said. That whittled down the state’s unemployment rate, which dropped from 12.2 percent in 2010 to 5.4 percent in 2016. More recent readings from the state Employment Development Department have placed it as low as 4.7 percent, although it edged back up to 5.1 percent in August. Meanwhile, California’s annual growth rate has slipped to 1.6 percent, putting it roughly on par with the rest of the nation. And with the state at full employment, future job growth and economic gains will be blunted by the availability of workers." But like the rest of the US, the numbers that work for measures for the wealthiest 10% who own 76% of the country's wealth (stock valuation, State GDP, etc), don't necessarily work for everyone (take home pay, housing, insurance, etc.).
|
|
|
Post by katlady on Sept 24, 2017 20:08:25 GMT
I live in California and they need to quit messing around with all of this crap and start working on what is really needed here - jobs, affordable housing, and keep the criminals in jail. I'm sick and tired of idiots that supposedly run this state, and no I didn't vote for them. The illegal immigrants are the majority and the State of California pays more attention to them then the citizens and legal immigrants already here. I don't care if Trump doesn't declare his taxes, California needs to fix what is in their own backyards and not go looking for trouble. Not quite. California has a population of about 40 million. The illegal population in California is estimated to be about 3 million. We do have the largest illegal population in the U.S., but they account for about 10%, not a majority.
|
|