Presidential Tweet Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok, so I did a thing. It was a smart thing, a thing we all did at the time, and I was good at it! It wasn’t a bad thing. It was a good thing.

But ALSO, that is a total lie and not true, that thing. What the literal fuck.

Actually it's pretty common for a business to post paper losses for a very long time before turning a profit. Or does that mean that Facebook (0 taxes ever), Uber (losing almost 1 Billion dollars a quarter), Google (0 taxes), Snapchat (lost 2.2 Billion its first year on the exchange) are all bad businesses? How about Amazon, nearly 20 years before their first posted profit?

Uber is losing billions: Here's why investors don't care

You reinvest everything you can into the business so that you lose money, that gives you something called "carry forward" that can be used to offset taxes when you do start making a profit. Up to 20 years of losses can be carried forward and used to defray the taxes on your profits. How to Carry Forward Losses You're a fool if you file profits and pay taxes before you are ready to go big. If you have expendable income, which Trump did at the time, you skip the salary and reinvest everything into the business. You post losses, big ones, especially if you have investors. Your payday comes when you either have an event (sale or investor buyout or IPO, etc) or you turn enough profit to use your carry forward as a bank account and avoid all of the taxes to take a big profit. If the business doesn't get to the event, then the business files bankruptcy and liquidates everything, leaving the owner free and clear to start another business and do it again.

The media is hyping this (again) and spinning it like Trump did something almost every big business in America doesn't do. Someone needs to call out the ultra-lib companies like those I mentioned and point out that they are doing exactly the same thing Trump did. In fact, many of them offshore their headquarters and contract themselves to work here in America, effectively moving the money offshore specifically to show losses or avoid US taxes.
American Companies Like Offshore Tax Havens Too
 
Actually it's pretty common for a business to post paper losses for a very long time before turning a profit. Or does that mean that Facebook (0 taxes ever), Uber (losing almost 1 Billion dollars a quarter), Google (0 taxes), Snapchat (lost 2.2 Billion its first year on the exchange) are all bad businesses? How about Amazon, nearly 20 years before their first posted profit?

Uber is losing billions: Here's why investors don't care

You reinvest everything you can into the business so that you lose money, that gives you something called "carry forward" that can be used to offset taxes when you do start making a profit. Up to 20 years of losses can be carried forward and used to defray the taxes on your profits. How to Carry Forward Losses You're a fool if you file profits and pay taxes before you are ready to go big. If you have expendable income, which Trump did at the time, you skip the salary and reinvest everything into the business. You post losses, big ones, especially if you have investors. Your payday comes when you either have an event (sale or investor buyout or IPO, etc) or you turn enough profit to use your carry forward as a bank account and avoid all of the taxes to take a big profit. If the business doesn't get to the event, then the business files bankruptcy and liquidates everything, leaving the owner free and clear to start another business and do it again.

The media is hyping this (again) and spinning it like Trump did something almost every big business in America doesn't do. Someone needs to call out the ultra-lib companies like those I mentioned and point out that they are doing exactly the same thing Trump did. In fact, many of them offshore their headquarters and contract themselves to work here in America, effectively moving the money offshore specifically to show losses or avoid US taxes.
American Companies Like Offshore Tax Havens Too
I’m not arguing that it’s not common; I’m saying he has to pick. Either it’s common and acceptable and not a big deal or it’s a lie and misreported. It’s can’t really be both.
 
I’m not arguing that it’s not common; I’m saying he has to pick. Either it’s common and acceptable and not a big deal or it’s a lie and misreported. It’s can’t really be both.

If it's common and acceptable, but the media reports/spins it as if it is not, then is the media not lying and misreporting?
 
If it's common and acceptable, but the media reports/spins it as if it is not, then is the media not lying and misreporting?
Man, I love you, but you gotta read what I’m saying.

It’s not the media; it’s me. I’m the one saying this. The president speaks to the people with his Twitter, I’m taking his message and giving my opinion on his direct communication.

The president is saying it’s common business practice. I agree. No issues. Smart, rich people have been exploiting tax laws since there were tax laws.

He’s saying the report is highly inaccurate and a hit job- and he’s a noted liar. He hasn’t produced anything to the contrary; I have no reason to believe it’s not another lie.

So in the same tweet, he’s saying 1- he did nothing wrong and that 2- the report that he did nothing wrong was a ‘hit job’.

That’s retarded.
 
Man, I love you, but you gotta read what I’m saying.

It’s not the media; it’s me. I’m the one saying this. The president speaks to the people with his Twitter, I’m taking his message and giving my opinion on his direct communication.

The president is saying it’s common business practice. I agree. No issues. Smart, rich people have been exploiting tax laws since there were tax laws.

He’s saying the report is highly inaccurate and a hit job- and he’s a noted liar. He hasn’t produced anything to the contrary; I have no reason to believe it’s not another lie.

So in the same tweet, he’s saying 1- he did nothing wrong and that 2- the report that he did nothing wrong was a ‘hit job’.

That’s retarded.

That's exactly what I read you saying. I partially disagree. I do agree the communication from Trump could be clarified by splitting it up. That said, he's right on both assertions in the tweets. What he did IS common business practice. The New York Times DID, and continues to, spin it as if he did something wrong and has been for years. Their pieces have not been objective, they are written in a way people that don't know business practices will read and think "Oh my gawd, Trump didn't do well in business, look how much money he lost. He lied to us about his success in order to become President." Their newest piece continues building on that theme. Opinion | What Is Donald Trump Hiding? and cites THEMSELVES as proof. Yes, I know it's labelled opinion, but it's written by the Editorial Board of the Times.

Here's an example from the current piece

Mr. Trump reported that his Irish golf business had revenues of $14 million, while a separate report to Irish regulators said the business lost about $2 million. For most of Mr. Trump’s ventures, there is no public account of the bottom line.

All three statements are true, but putting them together this way implies wrongdoing.

How is that a discrepancy? Revenue doesn't equal profit, but they are implying that it does. I had 7 figure revenue in my business for a couple of years and managed to post losses of $175K. Does that mean that I was defrauding anyone? Hell no. But the logic used by the Times would say that I did. They are using logical fallacies to further their case that the President is hiding something. It's intellectually dishonest and they should be called out on it
 
Actually it's pretty common for a business to post paper losses for a very long time before turning a profit. Or does that mean that Facebook (0 taxes ever), Uber (losing almost 1 Billion dollars a quarter), Google (0 taxes), Snapchat (lost 2.2 Billion its first year on the exchange) are all bad businesses? How about Amazon, nearly 20 years before their first posted profit?

Uber is losing billions: Here's why investors don't care

You reinvest everything you can into the business so that you lose money, that gives you something called "carry forward" that can be used to offset taxes when you do start making a profit. Up to 20 years of losses can be carried forward and used to defray the taxes on your profits. How to Carry Forward Losses You're a fool if you file profits and pay taxes before you are ready to go big. If you have expendable income, which Trump did at the time, you skip the salary and reinvest everything into the business. You post losses, big ones, especially if you have investors. Your payday comes when you either have an event (sale or investor buyout or IPO, etc) or you turn enough profit to use your carry forward as a bank account and avoid all of the taxes to take a big profit. If the business doesn't get to the event, then the business files bankruptcy and liquidates everything, leaving the owner free and clear to start another business and do it again.

The media is hyping this (again) and spinning it like Trump did something almost every big business in America doesn't do. Someone needs to call out the ultra-lib companies like those I mentioned and point out that they are doing exactly the same thing Trump did. In fact, many of them offshore their headquarters and contract themselves to work here in America, effectively moving the money offshore specifically to show losses or avoid US taxes.
American Companies Like Offshore Tax Havens Too
You know, you're not wrong, and neither is the president.
But when you're the president and feel the need to spend multiple tweets explaining how the complicated tax structure made it so that you didn't actually lose $1.1 billion over 10 years, you've already lost the messaging fight. Especially when it's a tax structure that your base will never, ever, have access to.
 
That's exactly what I read you saying. I partially disagree. I do agree the communication from Trump could be clarified by splitting it up. That said, he's right on both assertions in the tweets. What he did IS common business practice. The New York Times DID, and continues to, spin it as if he did something wrong and has been for years. Their pieces have not been objective, they are written in a way people that don't know business practices will read and think "Oh my gawd, Trump didn't do well in business, look how much money he lost. He lied to us about his success in order to become President." Their newest piece continues building on that theme. Opinion | What Is Donald Trump Hiding? and cites THEMSELVES as proof. Yes, I know it's labelled opinion, but it's written by the Editorial Board of the Times.

Here's an example from the current piece



All three statements are true, but putting them together this way implies wrongdoing.

How is that a discrepancy? Revenue doesn't equal profit, but they are implying that it does. I had 7 figure revenue in my business for a couple of years and managed to post losses of $175K. Does that mean that I was defrauding anyone? Hell no. But the logic used by the Times would say that I did. They are using logical fallacies to further their case that the President is hiding something. It's intellectually dishonest and they should be called out on it
I just don’t know how to proceed from here. Let’s try...

I, a person, am saying that-

- I understand the tax shelters and claiming losses to avoid paying taxes. I’ve done it myself. I am not saying he’s wrong for doing so. It’s the law. The president, en elite, used the tax laws to get out of paying taxes because he thinks that paying income tax is stupid. No foul here.

- the president also said the report is inaccurate; he provided no proof on the matter and hasn’t addressed it since. The president is a liar, isn’t going to release tax records, so I suppose we will never know. Other than you can’t trust anything the president says especially in regards to his business deals or successes.

- The fact that the president needed to make sure everyone knows that the report (that he did something completely legal and in no way ‘wrong’) isn’t true is fucking dumb. It’s a dumb tweet. This is the dumb presidential tweet thread.

I’m not saying the report is valid; I’m not saying the president did something illegal; I’m not agreeing in any way with any news outlet.

Just me. Talking about a tweet. That’s fucking stupid. Because the president tweets dumb shit.
 
So, what the President tweets gets annoying. Is he wrong? Not sure. But the "Liberal" Media carefully mischaracterizing the facts for their own agenda is definitely wrong. The yellow journalism is definitely wrong. Especially because this is a target rich environment...
 
So, what the President tweets gets annoying. Is he wrong? Not sure. But the "Liberal" Media carefully mischaracterizing the facts for their own agenda is definitely wrong. The yellow journalism is definitely wrong. Especially because this is a target rich environment...
That comment was a perfect 7 word start. Downhill from there.

Fox News isn’t liberal. Neither is OANN and a host of other ‘sources’. Don’t like the ‘liberal bias’ of a source? Watch yours of choice. Pretty simple.

There are plenty of white knights out there carrying the president’s banner and protecting his honor.
 
That comment was a perfect 7 word start. Downhill from there.

Fox News isn’t liberal. Neither is OANN and a host of other ‘sources’. Don’t like the ‘liberal bias’ of a source? Watch yours of choice. Pretty simple.

There are plenty of white knights out there carrying the president’s banner and protecting his honor.
Fox News is kinda liberal though...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top