211–220 of 459 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a repellent atitude. "Fuck you got mine" in all its glory.
I'd rather sum it as "live and let die"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A friend of mine has been working on this same angle since Trump was elected. Politico covered his work in August: http://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/20/trump-bombshells-ro... His website is here: Weird money in, weird money out https://ragepath.org/weird-money-in-weird-money-out And below is his working hypothesis: We've documented Trump's relations with a variety of Soviet and Russian individuals and organizatio…
"But he borrowed 160 mln against the building" This is where your argument collapses. The building dramatically increased in value - that's why he was able to borrow so much against it. That's the real estate game - and it's legit.
I see you're also an apologist for Facebook's approach to Russian ads during the election.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would say this is a false equivocation to the extent that the "database" that the author referenced in beginning of the metaphor should not include victimless crimes such as "drug abuse". The author also assumes that there would be a de-facto backlash against the "hacker"'s behavior. I don't think so. If the justice system is "innocent until proven guilty", and these people are proven guilty in a court of law by ev…
> Do you as a citizen strive to minimize your tax burden to the most extent it makes sense and is legal? The problem is that regular citizens do not have access to means of minimizing their taxes to the extent that the wealthy have. It's been shown over and over again that corporations and wealthy individuals can shrink their tax rates to be as low as 2%. Nobody else can get that low. That is the fundamental problem:…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Don't we all have the right to a basic level of livelihood? You have the right to it, but you're not entitled to it. To me, having the right to do something means you can't be prosecuted for doing it. It doesn't mean that society must help you.
Then you're using "right" in a very different way from what we expect around here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Money that you spend on buying software, hiring etc isn’t generally taxable anyway. A business is generally taxed on income, not revenue. You also have to ask, where is the money coming from? In this case, it would appear to be through radically increasing the deficit. There will ultimately be consequences to that (for instance, in a few years, as the US’s credit rating comes under pressure, increased repayments may…
> Money that you spend on buying software, hiring etc isn’t generally taxable anyway. A business is generally taxed on income, not revenue. But reducing my quarterly and annual tax liabilies allows me to spend more on these things because there is more cash for the business at the end of the day.
If it's profitable, leverage it. You don't have to go nuts and borrow millions, but if you can generate a better return on debt than the interest rate, which shouldn't be too hard given today's interest rates, you can build your business faster.
If you're aggressively expanding your company you'll be channelling any profits back into it, so you're going to barely break-even from a tax perspective and your tax payments will be negligible.
If you're doing this and not seeing the right tax benefits already, get a better accountant.
Jeffery Carr wrote about Milner's ties to the FSB/KGB in 2011
http://archive.li/2Lv1b#selection-549.14-549.39
...and got fired from Forbes Magazine for writing about it...
https://twitter.com/JamesFourM/status/915361529012289536
Theres certainly a major back story here.
If a company doesn't use these tax-avoidance means, it becomes uncompetitive and gets eaten by those, that do. Moreover, there is a wealth of tax optimizing consultants with great knowledge of holes one gets access to once their revenue reaches $x00,000,000, often sanctioned by governing bodies. So if one makes it to the club, the easy way to stay there is to adopt the same disgusting practices like everybody else an…
>If a company doesn't use these tax-avoidance means, it becomes uncompetitive and gets eaten by those, that do. I don't understand why that would be the case.
Since there are no top level comments putting this out for probably obvious reasons, here is a supportive comment for the article. This is what people feel in their guts when they drive out on tattered roads and avoid going to the hospital even though they are sick, when they don't have a real increase in wages but are working longer hours. They have the sense that something isn't right, that there are two sets of ru…
A friend of mine has been working on this same angle since Trump was elected. Politico covered his work in August: http://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/20/trump-bombshells-ro... His website is here: Weird money in, weird money out https://ragepath.org/weird-money-in-weird-money-out And below is his working hypothesis: We've documented Trump's relations with a variety of Soviet and Russian individuals and organizatio…
a telling hypothesis, now we know who to blame Mr Trump on. I am sorry to tell you but your friend is doing it on the dime of someone pushing the current hysterical Russophobia. Either that or he is delusional.
My parents always taught me to be honest and care about those around you. The older I got the more I realized that was mal-adaptive behavior in capitalistic society. The real goal of capitalism is exploit or be exploited.
The real goal of capitalism is to increase the amount of capital available. This fundamentally is not possible via exploitation alone. Capitalism - nor the economy - is not a zero-sum game. This type of simplistic thinking makes people dismiss real criticisms over the real-world implementation of American capitalism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"But he borrowed 160 mln against the building" This is where your argument collapses. The building dramatically increased in value - that's why he was able to borrow so much against it. That's the real estate game - and it's legit.
Hi Vasili - I don't think you understand. He bought an office building on Wall Street in the mid-1990s for $1 million. That's a price so low that it's shady. As usual with Trump, he buys real estate at prices that don't make sense unless you assume there's another half to the trade. Then he borrows money against the building's supposed increase in value and uses that debt as income without an income tax. His deals ar…