Thursday, October 13, 2016

NYT hit piece on Donald Trump demonstrates stunning financial illiteracy of the left

The truth of the matter is that they failed to even try.  They merely concocted a fraudulent hit piece out of full cloth based on two or three line entries in a tax return representing the turn over of billions of dollars in business that was clearly not theirs.

A detailed analysis of sophisticated tax strategy is far beyond these folks pay grade.

Once again, the primary place to manufacture losses in real estate is to have rapid write downs against highly leverage assets.  The write downs give you your losses early but then they are recovered years later in revenues which is why they are tolerated for real estate developers.

What happens is that so long as a developer is active and even expanding his portfolio he can keep postponing the day of tax reckoning while building up his portfolio..


INSANITY: NYT hit piece on Donald Trump demonstrates stunning financial illiteracy of the left... money for nothing and chicks for free

Sunday, October 02, 2016

(NaturalNews) The New York Times just destroyed any last vestige of credibility it might have had by violating the law to publish a 20-year-old Trump tax return showing a $915 million loss back in the 1990s. According to the NYT, the fact that Donald Trump correctly listed a business loss on his tax returns means, somehow, that he's a bad person. The absurd assumption in all this is that all business owners should pay huge taxes to the federal government even when they lose money.

At the same time, the NYT and the entire fake media establishment (CNN, Washington Post, MSNBC, etc.) has deliberately failed to mention the more than $1 billion that Donald Trump's various businesses have paid over the last two decades in payroll taxes, property taxes, inventory taxes, import taxes, unemployment wage taxes, earned interest taxes and all the other categories of tax money that the federal government extracts from every business owner in America. The outlandishly false, absurd narrative from the NYT is that Donald Trump paid NO taxes for nearly 20 years... a completely fictitious, defamatory and blatantly false leap of nonsense that demonstrates a new low for the "toilet paper of record."

New York Times earns "F" in finance

In essence, the NYT and the entire lunatic flock of leftist sheeple in America think that all business owners should pay taxes even when they lose money. Only a bunch of financially retarded leftists could even fathom such a ridiculous idea, yet it's the foundation of the NYT story that's been making the rounds all day. The other assumption in that story is that taking legally allowed business deductions that are written into the IRS tax code is somehow immoral, as if "good" people just volunteer the maximum amount of money possible to be confiscated by Washington and wasted on truly dumb-as-dirt government spending programs that waste hundreds of billions of dollars a year.

Isn't it far more ethical to send less money to Washington D.C. and instead invest that money in jobs and wages for local people? How exactly does the NYT think finance actually works in the real world of business? (Answer: Like all incompetent leftists, they think money appears out of nowhere and that people who have money never really earned it.)

By the way, it also turns out that Hillary Clinton used the exact same tax reduction technique as Donald Trump to deduct $700,000 from her 2015 tax returns. You can view the official PDF here. Look at line 15, "Net long-term capital gain (or loss)." It shows a $699,540 claimed loss deduction by Hillary Clinton.

No, the government doesn't need your tax dollars to build anything... do the math

But the real absurdity in this story only becomes apparent when you hear ignorant leftist sheeple whining about Donald Trump's taxes, invoking the dumbest explanations you've ever heard in your entire life. "The government needs that money to build schools and bridges," say the cognitively retarded CNN worshippers. Obviously, they have no clue that the U.S. government has never tied spending to revenues. No matter how much money Washington confiscates from business owners, the corrupt, criminal cabal of f--ktards running the government will find ways to spend far more. How, exactly, do you think President Obama took us all the way to a mind-boggling $20 trillion in government debt in just eight years?

And it's even more hilarious when you realize that the government doesn't need any tax dollars whatsoever to create the money it needs to fund its operations. As the government has proven again and again during Wall Street bankster bailouts, it can simply create a trillion dollars overnight (via the Fed debt creation scheme) and use that money in any way it wants.

In reality, the government doesn't need any tax dollars to fund anything! The entire false narrative that assumes wage earners and business owners have to send money to Washington to pay for roads, bridges and schools is absolute hogwash. Out of the entire federal budget, the vast majority of the money actually goes to paying entitlement benefits (social security, Medicare, unemployement, etc.). 

Only a tiny fraction of government spending goes to roads, highways and bridges, and most of the money directed toward education ends up as salaries and grants, not building schools for children. The idea that, by taking legally allowed deductions on huge losses, somehow Donald Trump has deprived America of schools and roads isn't just absurd; it's the height of financial illiteracy. Then again, what else could we possibly expect from a newspaper run by leftists so out of touch with reality that they still think Hillary Clinton is an honest person?

Leftists will never understand the inherent risks in running a business

Nor does anyone in the liberal media bother to mention the very real risks that business owners take when running a business. Some years, you make money. Other years, you lose money. Every once in a while, you lose BIG, like Trump did in 1995. Are we now supposed to believe that even in the years when businesses suffer huge losses, they should still somehow find the money to send more tax dollars to Washington? Where are they supposed to get that money if they've already lost hundreds of millions? Does the New York Times really think businesses should take out huge loans on their losses so they can send more money to a government that's already $20 trillion in debt so it can flush even more money down a black hole? (Why am I not surprised this comes from a leftist newspaper owned and run by communists?)

See, leftists are morons when it comes to economics. They're clueless beyond belief on basic concepts like earning money, running a business, national debt, taxes or compounding interest. Trying to teach a leftist anything about money is a lot like trying to teach a retarded house cat how to swim laps in your backyard pool. (It wastes your time and annoys the cat.)

And nowhere in all this does Donald Trump get credit for creating jobs, creating real wealth, and paying taxes during years of profit. In contrast, Hillary Clinton has been collecting tens of millions of dollars from foreign donors while selling government influence to the highest bidder (which is a felony crime, by the way). From the cattle futures fiasco back in the 1980's to her present day $300,000 "speech" gigs for wealthy banks, Hillary Clinton has never worked an honest day in her life, and she's still collecting money by peddling government favors to foreign billionaires (watch the film "Clinton Cash" on to learn the details).

She's also left a long trail of economic destruction in her path, obliterating nation after nation that has fallen prey to her disastrous diplomacy and failed economic lunacy of the left. From Zero Hedge, see the "Complete A to Z of nations destroyed by Hillary Clinton.

I think Donald Trump can use his own money far more effectively than the wasteful, incompetent bureaucrats in Washington

Despite the fact that nearly every city and nation run by leftists eventually collapses into financial ruin, the NYT wants us all to believe that the wasteful, incompetent, corrupt federal government can use Donald Trump's money better than Donald Trump. Yes, it's a completely insane idea, but it reflects the degree of true economic lunacy that practically defines democrats in the media these days. To be a democrat journalist (i.e. Clinton operative), you have to cast aside any belief in mathematics and economics while pledging your eternal support to the kind of financial witchcraft and black magic practiced in our nation's capitol. After all, how else are you going to drum up artificially low unemployment numbers if you abide by legitimate numbers? Anyone who really believes America's unemployment rate is less than six percent must also believe you can fly by sticking a broomstick in your crotch.

I don't know about you, but I'd much rather have Donald Trump in charge of the nation's finances than ANY leftist who has never run a business. As a business owner myself, I know firsthand how difficult it is to make an honest profit in an oppressive, rigged, crony capitalism environment where the IRS has been turned into a political weapon to selectively audit enemies of the left. In fact, I believe so strongly in Donald Trump's economic vision that if Trump wins, we will be announcing a significant expansion that will create dozens of new jobs in Central Texas.

But if Clinton wins, those plans are on hold because she'll make sure that small business owners are punished for being successful. And isn't that the perfect summary of what democrats believe anyway? PUNISH those who succeed. Give out free stuff to those who refuse to work. Silence the opposition with false accusations of racism and bigotry. Destroy the economy so that everybody's poor enough to vote democrat...
It's sick. It's demented. And it's the strategy of the democrats. It's time to throw them all out of office.

No comments:

There was an error in this gadget