181–190 of 280 posts
Reminder; tax avoidance != tax fraud.
TL;DR: Think “Schrödinger's Criminality”.
Will it make a difference?
The real story is that they got leaked at all. I know there’s a huge left tile on HN so take your blue hat off for a minute and just think about this. The DNC has lusted after Trump’s returns for five years now. They finally acquired them (presumably at great expense) and published them immediately, not considering whether or not it would help their candidate. It stands to reason that they didn’t know what was in the returns if they went out of their way to obtain this nothingburger. Why publish them at all when you have the debate on Tuesday (that Trump will likely flub) that you could focus America on? Is the DNC more worried about this election than the polls show if they’re fishing like this?
Disclaimer: The polls are generally accurate IMHO. Biden has a ~75% chance to win and I agree with that. I also think “X candidate is in DEEP trouble in the polls”-type headlines help X candidate more than the opposition because higher voter turnout is triggered when voters think their votes will matter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That depends on the public interest. Are we talking about random John Does taxes which has a total of X dollars income/wealth? X alone might be large enough warranting some public interest, on top of that, it isn't random Joe, it is a well known public figure, which derives its publicity in the very facts the article is investigating: his claims of personal wealth and business acumen. Finally, that person is actually…
But it is still his finances as a private citizen, and not - for example - the details of some government agency. A matter being of interest to a subset of all citizens doesn’t justify its disclosure. We should either require disclosure by law (perhaps to an auditing firm instead of the public) or treat this as a purposeful and malicious leak of private, confidential information. I don’t think news media should get a…
But that is a major change, and to my knowledge never been the case in the US. Public figures, and once in a public office especially, have been in the news due to private information, usually more of the sexual kind, which resulted in the defenestration of said politician.
But to reiterate, the president chose to run for a public office on claims about his private finances. Those are challenged by information obtained by the press. And the press did not release the private, confidential information, but reported about information within it, pertaining to his claims. That is bona fide, what the press is supposed to do. The person who gave the information to the press, on the other hand, likely has broken the law.
The HN angle on this article is the NYT accounts system wasn't prepared for the deluge of subscriptions, fell over, served 500s for hours, and now they made the article free-to-all (as far as I can tell) in response. Get these journos some capacity planners and SREs.
I would have thought the HN angle is where do you draw the line between journalism and data leaks or identity theft? As much as large parts of the public wants to see his taxes, that doesn’t meant a newspaper can hide behind journalism to act as an intermediary to leak them. If that’s the standard then I’m sure it’d be fine for an intern at Joe Biden’s doctors office to leak his full medical records right? EDIT: I fi…
> Identity theft is the deliberate use of someone else's identity, usually as a method to gain a financial advantage or obtain credit and other benefits in the other person's name [..]
I don't think anyone can be impersonated based on tax documents, so I'm not sure why you would say that.
A valid journalistic act is putting forward information that the public can use to have a better picture about their environment. In my opinion this fits the definition pretty well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would have thought the HN angle is where do you draw the line between journalism and data leaks or identity theft? As much as large parts of the public wants to see his taxes, that doesn’t meant a newspaper can hide behind journalism to act as an intermediary to leak them. If that’s the standard then I’m sure it’d be fine for an intern at Joe Biden’s doctors office to leak his full medical records right? EDIT: I fi…
On the other hand he called for a foreign country to hack into his opponents' email and release all of it. So, he obviously doesn't value privacy that much
One must to keep in mind that cognitive bias has us parsing those we dislike quite literally, while giving those we fancy a pass.
And that's true in all 57 states.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Simple: it is not “true” to those who support him. They are told a completely different story - one of a successful businessman with unbending will, unfairly persecuted by the media, here to manifest God’s plan. Yes, including that last one. Talk to any fundamental Christian on why.
I am absolutely positive that they will vote for him even if he publicly endorses Biden himself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you read the article, you'd see that there is a critical thing where he got a 70 million dollar refund, in a manner which probably violated IRS Guidelines. This has been debated since 2011, and has still not reached a decision. If the IRS (and Congress, since they need to sign off on all refunds for individuals > 2 million) declare that he was not entitled to that refund (which from the article seems like the way…
No conflict of interest there. Nothing to see folks. This is total BS. At this point I am about to cut ties with my family that supports Trump. This is beyond anything approaching reason.
Cutting ties due to flavor of political leanings sounds very short sighted.
My parents are religious I am not, catholic church was actively protecting pedophiles.
Should I cut ties to my family??
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand he called for a foreign country to hack into his opponents' email and release all of it. So, he obviously doesn't value privacy that much
Tasteless joke, or substantive call for a privacy invasion? One must to keep in mind that cognitive bias has us parsing those we dislike quite literally, while giving those we fancy a pass. And that's true in all 57 states.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tasteless joke, or substantive call for a privacy invasion? One must to keep in mind that cognitive bias has us parsing those we dislike quite literally, while giving those we fancy a pass. And that's true in all 57 states.
In my opinion people in high visibility, high power jobs are not allowed to make tasteless jokes towards the people they have power over. It avoids such misunderstandings.
A substantial chunk of voters appear disdainful of meticulously courteous but otherwise objectionable leaders.
I didn't care for Bush43's speeches, but Trump makes W seem a rhetorical genius.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Commercial real estate loans are often non recourse. You lend to the holding company who owns the property. If it fails you don’t necessarily have a claim on the owners of that company. And I would expect covid to have decimated the value of commercial real estate, particularly hotels.
This is briefly discussed in the NYT article. Apparently some of the loans are borrowed against his personal holdings.