Boomers gen x and the rich fucked us over with debt they should take more responsibility

That is very true. Trump uses experts to find loopholes.

fauxlaw wrote:

What is it about "voluntary" that is misunderstood, even with tradition? Voluntary is a candidate-by-candidate choice, correct? To hell with tradition. Doing something because everyone does it is the worst justification.

Presidents disclose taxes to show us he has no conflicts of interest and is paying and being productive and how. Why shouldn't that be expected disclosed? You seem to be giving a knee jerk reaction to say he shouldn't have to. But I question if you can justify that, especially given you aint his lawyer or public relations guy

Well, easy to say when it's easy to say.

But I am not denying the necessity of conformity to the system...Such is how survival and society have evolved.

Though money is no more than an elaborate extension of waking, hunter gathering, sex and death...And therein lies the farce.

Tax fraud is not a Hunter gathering, sex and death skill.

I think what we have today is more of the result of how the system is built than some grand conspiracy by an entire generation. Corporations being given personhood and the lobbying structure is probably more to blame for the debt model than a generation. When a corporation gets to argue against its own checks and balances obviously they move towards whats profitable. Then there is the removal of taxation on estate inheritance which was a control on the consolidation of wealth. Big surprise that when you have rich people in power they set the system in their favor.

Although I also strongly disagree with the whole 'equality in application' arguments that follow wealth redistribution through most social programs. And the sad truth is that being in poverty in America is still being very wealthy globally speaking and even being homeless in America you get a quality of life thats better than the majority of the global population. Americans do not recognize how well they have it.

Well, I would have expected you to recognise and understand the analogy.

The top 5% pay 60% of income taxes in spite of your claim.

The top 5% of U.S. households also own 66% of the country's wealth.

This proves the disproportionate distribution of wealth in America.

Presidents disclose taxes to show us he has no conflicts of interest and is paying and being productive and how. Why shouldn't that be expected disclosed? You seem to be giving a knee jerk reaction to say he shouldn't have to. But I question if you can justify that, especially given you aint his lawyer or public relations guy

I will address in order:

Presidents disclose taxes to show us he has no conflicts of interest

Presidents and presidential candidates, you mean?

Why shouldn't that be expected disclosed?

The disclosure of tax returns by political candidates is a political tradition, not a matter of statutory law or documented government policy. It can be made statutory law or Executive policy if you either contact your Senators and/or House Rep to make the suggestion. It's on you, my friend.

You seem to be giving a knee jerk reaction to say he shouldn't have to. But I question if you can justify that,

No knee-jerk. I am citing the current condition of the voluntary status of personal disclosure. That is my justification, pure and simple. That you disagree and want to change it is obvious, but you must accept the current condition of voluntary status. I've given you the means to make your wish balloon happen, but I am suspicious that Congress is not inclined to tie themselves to such statutory legislation to make such disclosure mandatory, and I doubt any President would sign himself and future Presidents to such disclosure by statutory law. Kind of like term limits, which amendment has been suggested and failed several times for the same reason.

There happens to be a good reason why such disclosure is currently, personally voluntary. By federal law (26 U.S.C. § 6103), all personal and business tax returns are strictly confidential by default. Unauthorized public disclosure of tax data by government officials is a felony [for which the New York Times, and perhaps others [IRS?], maybe ought to be charged.] A person is authorized to disclose his or her own tax returns, but no one else, particularly not the IRS. To do so would violate this statute. Stick that in your knee-jerk.

Yes, but you must recall that Democrats [granted, not all, but enough] voted with Republicans to pass legislation allowing tax-exempt and tax-deferred investments that add to the 5%'s annual income, which is not the same as their net worth. It ususally akes two to tango, even to political music.

True communism redistributed the wealth of the country unlike capitalism which keeps wealth in the hands of a few.

People fall into place and profit accordingly...Its the way the human social system has always worked.

But now we substitute food, sex and survival with a bank balance.

It’s called the evolution of the social system.

You still haven't explained why a president shouldn't have to disclose all that. Maybe you have a tone that maybe confidential means you like privacy? You arent clear if thats a reason. All you stated is that its not legally required and that its on me to change it if I dont like it.

You are a super smart dude but you so often struggle with basic logic.

Once brainless masses get used to idea of rich people paying for all expenses brainless masses made, then that just motivates brainless masses to spend even more.

this type of democracy is indeed a path to communism.

When the unproductive wolves outnumber the productive sheep, you get an unproductive form of government such as communism.

China is the second largest economy in the world with half the nation debt than America. It leads in chip technology and in many other field.

You still haven't explained why a president shouldn't have to disclose all that

I haven't? Was the provision of the statute prohibiting disclosure not read by you? Here it is, in a nutshell, since your own research seems incapable.

26 U.S. Code § 6103 - Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information

(a) General rule

Returns and return information shall be confidential, and except as authorized by this title—

(1) no officer or employee of the United...

(2) no officer or employee of any...

(3) no other person (or officer or employee thereof)

shall disclose any return or return information obtained by him in any manner in connection with his service as such an officer or an employee, or otherwise, or under the provisions of this section. For purposes of this subsection, the term "officer or employee" includes a former officer or employee."

"No officer... shall disclose" is pretty doggone specific for a statutory law. No other statutory law, nor Executive Branch policy, exists demanding that a president or presidential candidate disclose their tax returns to the public, period. That means your "should" is DOA., unless either a statutory law is passed by Congress or an issued policy from the Executive stipulates otherwise. Do you get it, yet? That it is voluntary is, currently, the end of the road, boyo. But keep blowing. Your wish balloon is in dire need of bozone to keep it afloat.

Besides, if anyone worthy of the presidency is of ill repute, there are probably better ways to tell than by a tax return. But that, too, requires research capability.

your tax returns tell us if you are honest about your earnings and the taxable portion.

Im not sure if you are dodging the question on purpose or if you just misunderstand it. I understand the president has no legal obligation to disclose his taxes. The question im asking is whether its smart to let the president have that option, or whether he should be required by law to disclose.

Trump is the only president who refused to disclose his taxes to the public like all prior presidents. Then he was charged with tax evasion.

And I have already told you I understand your question. I reply, again, that as it is not currently a requirement for a president to release tax returns to the public, you, personally, have the option to suggest it to be legislated as a statute to require it by direct contact with your Senators and congressman. It's on you. My preference is that it remain voluntary.

OK? We disagree. Live with it.

Debby:

How many times are you going to insist on this media lie? DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH!!!

DONALD TRUMP HAS NEVER, EVER, BEEN PERSONALLY INDICTED, TRIED, NOR CONVICTED OF TAX EVASION. TRUMP ORG, A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ENTITY, WAS. GET IT YET?

Its not that I cant accept your answer. Its that there must be a public policy reason that you support not requiring the president to disclose his taxes, but its basically irrational to not be willing to state your reason. Probably you cant give a reason because its defenseless. You tend to do that... when backed into a corner with logic, you masterfully evade the situation

Trump benefited from his company’s tax fraud and evasion.

It's the same reason pied-à-terre tax millionaires left New York after Mamdani published and disseminated a list of the PEOPLE who were paying the tax.

It's promoting class warfare and violence. There is no upside, no matter how you break it down. Many socialists in America wear the skin of fiscal responsibility to provide a casus belli against classes and justifying the violence.

Now Trump and his family are exempt from IRS tax review.

its basically irrational to not be willing to state your reason. Probably you cant give a reason because its defenseless.

Ah, so you think. Rationale has nothing to do with it. My defense is one of the best there is. It's called "freedom of speech." That includes, my verbose friend, the unwritten, but obviously implied right, also enshrined in the 5A, to remain silent. That is not an express admission of guilt for any reason. I am not compelled, period. I know that is something the media despises, because it does limit the number of pages they can otherwise fill with their usually absurd assumptions, but we all do enjoy that right. Defenseless? Nope. Neither your need nor your right to know can be proven by you.

You tend to do that... when backed into a corner with logic, you masterfully evade the situation...

The fact that you don't even discuss the one tax return that was voluntarily submitted heavily implies you are also wearing the skin of fiscal responsibility for an ulterior goal. That's not logic, it's deception. Socialists want to radically transform USA into a "guilty until proven innocent" type nation in order to promote class warfare, where everyone is required to justify every choice they make from cradle to the grave to an uncaring authoritarian. It's against your constitution and also moral decency, where your country moved away from scarlet-letter branding.

Your Congress released six years of tax returns in December 2022, but you were asleep along with Biden, apparently. And zero legal cases were filed after the 2022 release. The skin of legitimacy can't hide the stench of TDS.

Debby,

Now Trump and his family are exempt from IRS tax review.

How do you figure, since neither Trump's annual personal financial statement nor his tax return is co-mingled with those of Trump Org?