Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

LexusLover · 10-02-2016, 09:24 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sistine Chapel View Post
... he's stupid and keeps losing money hand over fist.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LexusLover

.. and he's worth how much?

I guess you have a greater net worth than Trump does, then.

2nd try to get a friggin straight answer from the queen of nothing ....

..... speaking of fisting!

IIFFOFRDB · 10-02-2016, 09:37 AM

Judge Jeanine's Open 7 is good enough, Shit Eater...

dilbert firestorm · 10-02-2016, 09:44 AM

if donald trump is losing money hand over fist, how is he still rich, and not in the poor house?????

people call him stupid for losing money that way, but he's apparently smart enough to take advantage of the loopholes in tax laws to minimize his loss.

love him or hate him, the guy is smart!!!!!

LexusLover · 10-02-2016, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

if donald trump is losing money hand over fist, how is he still rich, and not in the poor house?????

You do understand that "conclusion" is from a "small ball" perspective....of the slow pitch variety.

Reminds me of movie critics: Never saw one who made a movie!

Sistine Chapel · 10-02-2016, 09:52 AM

Not worried one iota bout you two loons. Once Hillary wins you both can re don your straight jackets.

LexusLover · 10-02-2016, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sistine Chapel

Not worried one iota bout you two loons.

Does it make you feel more intelligent to call people "stupid" .. ."idiot" ..... and ..... "loons"?

Or do you think it makes any difference to those you do call names?

Let's see .... who are you?

Should it makes any difference to anyone what you "think"? Or do you "think"?

Sistine Chapel · 10-02-2016, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Does it make you feel more intelligent to call people "stupid" .. ."idiot" ..... and ..... "loons"?

Or do you think it makes any difference to those you do call names?

Let's see .... who are you?

Should it makes any difference to anyone what you "think"? Or do you "think"?

^ haha melting down I see. Carry on

nevergaveitathought · 10-02-2016, 10:51 AM

we have an artificial time period in determining taxable income. we wall everything off within a year's time.

for people in business, a one year wall-off in deciding someone's true economic income is just wrong
for people who just get a W-2, or more likely in a dimocrat voters case, dont even work, well they just don't get it and Clinton and her news media knows that

we have a system based on taxing net income, but arriving at net taxable income is complicated and has many many rules

one such rule is allowing loss carrybacks and carryforwards because the law recognizes the artificiality of determining taxable income year by year.

for a net operating loss arising in 1995, the law was that the loss could be carried back three years and then carried forward 15 years

so if trump had a 900 million dollar loss, which is possible, it could have been carried back first to 1992 and taxes paid in that year recovered. if any loss still remained then on to 1993 and then to 1994

if any loss remained after the carry back period, it could have been carried forward to off set future taxable income until used up but only up to 2010

a taxpayer can elect to forgo the carry back period and carry the entire loss forward only

any remaining loss, if not completely used up by 2010, just disappears.

for someone like me, I can obtain an oil lease in one year, and it is not deductible, even though I spent the money. I am taxed on more income than I actually pocketed. If the lease expires after the primary term of three years, its a loss in that third year. its an artificial determination of my income on a year by year basis.

eventually, over a number of years, if you live long enough, a persons taxable income will equal the cash he actually pockets other than something known as statutory depletion, which is allowed small independents and royalty owners, but not to trump

so if trump had a loss, as artificial as it is being determined just over a one year period, it was a loss, and so what?

he didn't let the loss stop him. he didn't quit. he kept going forward and look what he built. the carryback and forwards allowed also help keep a business alive because the government knows the amount of taxes its pays in just payroll taxes for one example

he has paid a lot of taxes, including income taxes. he has paid property tax, sales tax, excise taxes, payroll taxes for thousands of employees and yes INCOME TAX. much more tax than the schemers and takers otherwise known as the clintons

Solemate62 · 10-02-2016, 11:00 AM

The typical refrain of those who think he's a genius, he's smart to not pay taxes. Yeah, he's smarter than the servile minions who will vote for him!

LexusLover · 10-02-2016, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solemate62

Yeah, he's smarter than the servile minions who will vote for him!

The same could be said of the current POTUS POS.

LexusLover · 10-02-2016, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sistine Chapel

^ haha melting down I see. Carry on

Typical. You don't disappoint.

When all else fails ... and you have ... play the "meltdown card"!

dilbert firestorm · 10-02-2016, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LexusLover

The same could be said of the current POTUS PUS.

there fixed that. lol!

lustylad · 10-02-2016, 02:00 PM

The New York Times story has over 5000 comments already!

Most of them are far more intelligent than anything Sissy Chap or LubedAss have ever posted in this forum!

Here is a sample:

"So if you had a business you would be happy to send part of profit as tax when you make one, and receive nothing when you lose money? This would sound fair to you? Be honest!

It's called 'loss carryforward', and it's used by ALL businesses from small to the largest and is the way to make taxation fair."

lustylad · 10-02-2016, 02:03 PM

The New York Times story has over 5000 comments already!

Most of them are far more intelligent than anything Sissy Chap or LubedAss have ever posted in this forum!

Here's another sample:

"If the government is entitled to a slice of your earnings, then it has to share in your losses as well. Think about it... Not being allowed to carry losses forward would be asymmetrical and inequitable to all taxpayers."

lustylad · 10-02-2016, 02:06 PM

The New York Times story has over 5000 comments already!

Most of them are far more intelligent than anything Sissy Chap or LubedAss have ever posted in this forum!

Here are a few more samples:

"Loss 'carryforwards' have been around for years...."

"The ability to claim and deduct business losses has been around as long as the income tax has...."

"Odd, I did the same exact thing on a lesser level. A loss carried forward is a loss carried forward. There is NOTHING complicated about it, if you do your own taxes you have seen it...."