Quote:
|
Originally Posted by loquitur
We have laws against fraud. There are huge incentives for private plaintiffs to bring corporate fraud-doers to heel. Prosecutors (I'm thinking federal prosecutors, mainly, but some state and local as well) can make their reputations bringing down big shots, and do. (Google the name "Phil Bennett" as a recent example.) So the notion that there is massive undetected fraud and theft in all big companies and the majority of rich people is just lunacy.
<h3>Of course there are some bad rich people. There are bad people everywhere. That doesn't mean most wealth is garnered by fraud and theft, it simply means that there are some bad people out there.</h3> The fact is, for every bad name Host throws out, I can throw out two (or more) names of people who made their money honestly and are well-respected for it. I bet I could even do it sticking with the names of rich people who are liberal Democrats. (They probably can't match Host's lofty ethical standards, but I doubt anyone who ever fired an employee can.)
|
C'mon, loquitur, the fraud and corruption at the top is rampant.
Here is an example, you can verify it yourself. Bush and his partners purchased the baseball team in the 80's for about $86 million, and they sold it, 14 years later, for less than $300 million, those numbers are part of the public record, but so is this:
Quote:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...al+gain&st=nyt
Bushes Had $1.3 Million In Income
By DAVID CAY JOHNSTON
Published: April 18, 2000
Gov. George W. Bush of Texas and his wife, Laura, revealed some limited information about their income taxes yesterday, issuing a brief statement that they had income of $1.3 million in 1999 on which they paid $514,000, or 39.5 percent of their income, in federal taxes.
There was no explanation in the one-page statement for the high rate of taxes, which was close to the highest federal tax rate, 39.6 percent. But when a return is filed, the actual tax may be lower, said Mindy Tucker, a campaign spokeswoman for Mr. Bush, the presumptive Republican nominee for president.
''The $514,000 represents withholding and estimated taxes paid, not actual taxes,'' Ms. Tucker said.
The 1999 income was less than a tenth the amount the Bushes made in 1998. That year the couple reported income of $18,405,524, on which they paid federal taxes of $3,772,252, or 20.5 percent.
Most of their 1998 income came from long-term capital gains, which are taxed at 20 percent. Their biggest capital gain that year was from a $600,000 investment in the Texas Rangers baseball team. That investment grew 25-fold in value, to $15 million, when the partnership that owned the team, lead by Tom Hicks, a leveraged buyout specialist, sold the Rangers for $250 million.
The salary for a Texas governor last year was $115,345, but Mr. Bush relinquished 55 days of pay because he was campaigning, lowering his state salary to $97,964, said Anne Trenolone, a spokeswoman in the gubernatorial press office....
|
Shouldn't Bush's long term capital gain on the baseball team investment, considering that he never invested personally more than $1 million in the team, (and maybe even less than that...), if the team was sold for an amount that was less than 4 times the purchase price, been a capital gain of no more than $4 million?
How do you explain Bush paying taxes on at least $14 million in income in 1998, at the 20 percent long term capital gains tax rate, instead of at the higher, earned income rate of 39.2 percent?
Bush explained that his accountants took an "aggressive position" in deciding how to categorize Bush's actual capital gains. What do you call what Bush did, loquitur? It looks like he ducked paying an additional $3 million in taxes that he clearly owed.
If you disagree, don't you need to provide data that Bush invested more than I've posted, or that they team was purchased for less or sold for more than I've posted?
Isn't anything else, no matter how you slice or dice it, clear evidence of gross income tax fraud? What kind of example does it set, or influence perception that we live in a two tiered oligarchy of gross wealth inequity?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ngdawg
Where in those links does it mention that McCain's in-laws are running for office?
While Clinton was president, he pardoned 140 convicted felons, including.....his own brother.
Every bottle of Heinz you bought put a portion into John Kerry's campaign box.
I'm about as unemotional about this election as a person can get....yet you're on some sort of get'em because McCain's inlaws weren't stellar(well, gee whiz, Wally!) and then accuse me of being emotionally charged....
Relax, dude....
As a footnote, Hillary has both black and Jewish bloodlines.I find that about as interesting as McCain's inlaws being convicted of something decades ago.
In other words, ain't got nothin to do with anything now. Come back when MCain makes daddy-in-law a Cabinet member.
|
We're not even in the same discussion, ngdawg.....I gave you specifics, you ignored or distorted them, and now you've marched on Clinton, H
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ngdawg
Where in those links does it mention that McCain's in-laws are running for office?
While Clinton was president, he pardoned 140 convicted felons, including.....his own brother.
Every bottle of Heinz you bought put a portion into John Kerry's campaign box.
I'm about as unemotional about this election as a person can get....yet you're on some sort of get'em because McCain's inlaws weren't stellar(well, gee whiz, Wally!) and then accuse me of being emotionally charged....
Relax, dude....
As a footnote, Hillary has both black and Jewish bloodlines.I find that about as interesting as McCain's inlaws being convicted of something decades ago.
In other words, ain't got nothin to do with anything now. Come back when MCain makes daddy-in-law a Cabinet member.
|
Huh???? ngdawg, I showed you that the money that McCain now possesses, had to knowingly come to him, and that it is proceeds from original investments made with organized crime proceeds invested into an opportunity provided by organized crime connections.
I asked at what point you think McCain's money was cleansed, and above is your response.
You've moved onto new things....how many criminals, in his own administration, and in Reagan's administration, did Bush Sr. pardon? Who had congressional hearings held about his pardons, Bush Sr. or Clinton? What was determind by those hearings?
Again, did McCain or did he not, immerse himself in the employment and the money of an Arizona organized crime figure?
It seems like a valid and a simple question, because he's running for president, and his past with Hensley either makes him stupid and incurious, or unethical.