Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

The problem isn't illegals; the problem is the tax laws that allow for people to get paid for having children. I bet that figure pales in comparison to the tens of billions that legal residents claim in the same scam.

 

There is no justifiable reason for anyone to have a negative effective tax rate. But politicians want to keep buying votes with your money and voters keep letting them get away with it.

Posted

Does this get moved to PPP before or after it gets out of hand? Stay tuned!...

Out of hand? Since when do threads with political leanings get out of hand? Psh.

Posted (edited)

Out of hand? Since when do threads with political leanings get out of hand? Psh.

 

Especially when it deals with minorities! We'll be fine, Im sure. ;)

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

To the OP, we could have made up more than TRIPLE that $4.2Billion, but instead we let BP write off the oil spill clean-up and save $13B...

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/22/bp-cut-tax-13b-losses-spill/

 

It's a great system all around, I tell ya.

Edited by DrDareustein
Posted

Especially when it deals with minorities! We'll be fine, Im sure. ;)

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

To the OP, we could have made up more than TRIPLE that $4.2Billion, but instead we let BP write off the oil spill clean-up and save $13B...

 

http://www.foxnews.c...b-losses-spill/

 

It's a great system all around, I tell ya.

 

BP is a business and businesses pay taxes on profits, no? So isn't every legitimate business expense a "write-off"?

Posted

And yet when discussing closing tax loopholes, like those on corporate jets, some members of Congress say saving $2B is hardly worth the trouble. So maybe $4.2B isn't really a lot of money?

 

PTR

 

So you're equating tax loopholes to tax fraud??

Posted

BP is a business and businesses pay taxes on profits, no? So isn't every legitimate business expense a "write-off"?

 

Sure, that's the technicality they used. BP paid $0 in taxes that year. So they mustve made $0 in profit, right? Wonder how they're managing to keep the lights on... :rolleyes:

 

Like I said, the system is a mess. Just like the Government.

 

Loop holes and technicalities galore, non-stop spending, and everyone wonders why the country is hemorrhaging money.

Posted

Sure, that's the technicality they used. BP paid $0 in taxes that year. So they mustve made $0 in profit, right? Wonder how they're managing to keep the lights on... :rolleyes:

 

Or less. Profit does not equal cash flow.

Posted (edited)

So you're equating tax loopholes to tax fraud??

 

When politicians or the very wealthy do it, they call it loopholes. When anyone else does it, they call it fraud.

 

No matter what you call it, it's usually shady business. Just because one is within the (broken) rules, doesnt make it any more right.

 

Definition of a Loophole: A loophole is an ambiguity in a system, such as a law or security, which can be used to circumvent or otherwise avoid the intent, implied or explicitly stated, of the system.

 

Sounds like fancy cheating to me.

Edited by DrDareustein
Posted (edited)

Sure, that's the technicality they used. BP paid $0 in taxes that year. So they mustve made $0 in profit, right? Wonder how they're managing to keep the lights on... :rolleyes:

 

Like I said, the system is a mess. Just like the Government.

 

Loop holes and technicalities galore, non-stop spending, and everyone wonders why the country is hemorrhaging money.

No doubt the government is a disaster, but a company offsetting its revenue with expenses is neither a technicality nor a 'loop hole'.

 

The government gets away with this crap so easily because people regurgitate sensationalized headlines and meaningless clichés rather than understanding the issue.

 

 

Definition of a Loophole: A loophole is an ambiguity in a system, such as a law or security, which can be used to circumvent or otherwise avoid the intent, implied or explicitly stated, of the system.

Please explain how BP reporting legal business expenses in the calculation of their tax liabilities fits that definition in any way.

Edited by KD in CT
Posted

No doubt the government i a disaster, but a company offsetting its revenue with expenses is neither a technicality or a 'loop hole'.

 

The government gets away with this crap so easily because people regurgitate sensationalized headlines and meaningless cliches rather than understanding the issue.

 

 

 

Please explain how BP reporting legal business expenses in the calculation of their tax liabilities fits that definition in any way.

Don't stop him. He's on a roll.

Posted

And yet when discussing closing tax loopholes, like those on corporate jets, some members of Congress say saving $2B is hardly worth the trouble. So maybe $4.2B isn't really a lot of money?

Yep. Except when it's coming from the 1%. Then it's "their fair share." While 46% of people pay no income tax.

Posted

When politicians or the very wealthy do it, they call it loopholes. When anyone else does it, they call it fraud.

 

No matter what you call it, it's usually shady business. Just because one is within the (broken) rules, doesnt make it any more right.

 

Definition of a Loophole: A loophole is an ambiguity in a system, such as a law or security, which can be used to circumvent or otherwise avoid the intent, implied or explicitly stated, of the system.

 

Sounds like fancy cheating to me.

 

I'd spend some time on this but I see it's been moved and you're too chickenshit to come over here.

Posted

Please explain how BP reporting legal business expenses in the calculation of their tax liabilities fits that definition in any way.

 

It just does because it makes him angry ok? :w00t:

Posted

I'd spend some time on this but I see it's been moved and you're too chickenshit to come over here.

 

 

Ever notice how if they do venture here it's usually to take a potshot before they run and hide?

×
×
  • Create New...