• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Whose Tax Returns Do We Need To See?

Captain Adverse said:
IMO? No one's tax returns "need to be seen."

It is prurient interest, seeking to find things to judge people on.

It's always other people's private affairs that need to be revealed, evaluated, and judged...few people think it should apply to them though.

People love to justify this nosiness in some way, usually claiming some moral good is done by it.

But taxes are an obligation, not a choice; we are compelled to reveal everything we do which earns money, everything we own to make sure the books can be balanced, and the government gets to keep records.

Bad enough that our personal lives can easily be revealed to the drones of the IRS, but to allow the general public access? I guess the question would really be, why not simply make them ALL matters of open public record?

Yours, mine, everyone's? How would that idea fly? Probably as well as a lead balloon.

So as far as I'm concerned, if everyone doesn't have to make their tax records an open book, then NO ONE should be required to do so.
Click to expand...

This all day long.
 
Middle_Ground said:
Yes, what's the problem? if their paychecks are being paid by we the people then they should be public.
Click to expand...

The vast majority have no influence on policy. I see no reason why they, and by extension their spouses if filing jointly, should have their financial situations become public record.
 
Captain Adverse said:
IMO? No one's tax returns "need to be seen."

It is prurient interest, seeking to find things to judge people on.
Click to expand...

It's more than that, obviously. POTUS and Congress, for example, are entrusted to spend something like $5 trillion per year of our money. It's not "prurient" interest to want to know if the POTUS or head of some committee in Congress recently bought $500k in an interest in a company that will triple overnight when that bill gets passed and signed. Tax returns aren't the ONLY way to find out whether those conflicts exist, but they are the BEST way and I don't see a legitimate argument that darkness and secrecy on behalf of those we entrust, our public servants, who wield massive power is good policy.

It's always other people's private affairs that need to be revealed, evaluated, and judged...few people think it should apply to them though.

People love to justify this nosiness in some way, usually claiming some moral good is done by it.
Click to expand...

Sunlight is a moral good when it comes to government, and those who run it. I'd like to see an argument against it, that we should PREFER to be ignorant and kept in the dark about how our elected officials make money.

But taxes are an obligation, not a choice; we are compelled to reveal everything we do which earns money, everything we own to make sure the books can be balanced, and the government gets to keep records.

Bad enough that our personal lives can easily be revealed to the drones of the IRS, but to allow the general public access? I guess the question would really be, why not simply make them ALL matters of open public record?

Yours, mine, everyone's? How would that idea fly? Probably as well as a lead balloon.

So as far as I'm concerned, if everyone doesn't have to make their tax records an open book, then NO ONE should be required to do so.
Click to expand...

On the flip side, running for office and asking to be trusted to responsibly spent $trillions of our money is a choice, and with that choice comes an obligation for transparency. If you don't like that, don't run for office and be entrusted with other people's money, their lives, and much more.
 
Captain Adverse said:
IMO? No one's tax returns "need to be seen."

It is prurient interest, seeking to find things to judge people on.

It's always other people's private affairs that need to be revealed, evaluated, and judged...few people think it should apply to them though.

People love to justify this nosiness in some way, usually claiming some moral good is done by it.

But taxes are an obligation, not a choice; we are compelled to reveal everything we do which earns money, everything we own to make sure the books can be balanced, and the government gets to keep records.

Bad enough that our personal lives can easily be revealed to the drones of the IRS, but to allow the general public access? I guess the question would really be, why not simply make them ALL matters of open public record?

Yours, mine, everyone's? How would that idea fly? Probably as well as a lead balloon.

So as far as I'm concerned, if everyone doesn't have to make their tax records an open book, then NO ONE should be required to do so.
Click to expand...

Just pointing out Omar's hypocrisy.
 
ocean515 said:
It's been demonstrated to me that most of the people screaming for the President's tax returns don't have a clue what one even shows.
Click to expand...

They may prove that Trump colluded with Russia to influence the election. Line 54b specifically asks, "During the current tax year have you colluded with a foreign government to influence a US election?". The left are hoping that Trump answered the question truthfully with a "yes".
 
Last edited:
ocean515 said:
It's been demonstrated to me that most of the people screaming for the President's tax returns don't have a clue what one even shows.
Click to expand...

Could be, but I know what they show and think they ought to be released, like every other President or candidate since Nixon.
 
Moderate Right said:
They may prove that Trump colluded with Russia to influence the election. Line 54b specifically asks, "During the current tax year have you ever colluded with a foreign government to influence a US election?". The left are hoping that Trump answered the question truthfully with a "yes".
Click to expand...

That question isn't on there, but if you looked at Romney's return you know there are a lot of disclosures about foreign holdings, and we'd see where he makes his money, what projects all of a sudden saw a big boost in reported income, etc. There's a wealth of information in them.
 
ocean515 said:
Change the Constitution. A custom doesn't mean anything.
Click to expand...

Or we could change the laws. That would do fine. That's the problem when someone Trump craps on norms and traditions that allow a bit of leeway. The alternative when someone does that is to make what was voluntary subject to laws. It's too bad, and it's sad the GOP had adopted the attitude, if Trump does it we must always defend it, if nothing else to own the libs.

At any rate, I was responding to your comment with my opinion. If you think being ignorant about a President's financial situation is good policy, I do not agree.
 
JasperL said:
That question isn't on there, but if you looked at Romney's return you know there are a lot of disclosures about foreign holdings, and we'd see where he makes his money, what projects all of a sudden saw a big boost in reported income, etc. There's a wealth of information in them.
Click to expand...

Trump is an international businessman. His tax returns will show that he does international business. We know he was involved with the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and we know he does real estate dealings all over the world. So what? We don't need tax returns to show that he was an international businessman. Everyone already knows that.
 
Moderate Right said:
Trump is an international businessman. His tax returns will show that he does international business. We know he was involved with the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and we know he does real estate dealings all over the world. So what? We don't need tax returns to show that he was an international businessman. Everyone already knows that.
Click to expand...

If we know all that, and tax returns don't tell us anything that we don't know, why won't Trump release them? Why did he lie repeatedly about releasing them? Why is his WH willing to break what is a clear law requiring the release of his tax returns, one that's been on the books for decades?

The answer of course is the returns will tell us a great deal we do NOT know. So pointing out a few things we already know a little bit about is a poor argument against releasing the rest of the information, most of it we have no idea of at this point.
 
Mycroft said:
Unless, of course, your name is Trump.
Click to expand...

And you are President of the U.S. and in charge of 100's of decisions monthly that could effect what is in those returns. The idea that it is "normal" to "trust" a President to administer those decisions fairly and in all our best interests is yet another barrage against the rule of law and the heart of our republic. Banana Republic here we come.
 
Anagram said:
The vast majority have no influence on policy. I see no reason why they, and by extension their spouses if filing jointly, should have their financial situations become public record.
Click to expand...

Yeah well don't get your paycheck from the people.
The chief of staff for (pick a department) doesn't have direct influence on policy....do you think they have indirect influence?
Why shouldn't they have to disclose?

I'll give you the janitors, plumbers, electricians so how about anyone elected and all senior staff. No tax refund...no job?
And to avoid someone having all janitors on staff make a salary cutoff.
 
Moderate Right said:
We know he was involved with the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and we know he does real estate dealings all over the world.
Click to expand...

"All over the world, but not Russia. Nothing in Russia" was the lie while he sought Trump Tower Moscow.
 
JasperL said:
Or we could change the laws. That would do fine. That's the problem when someone Trump craps on norms and traditions that allow a bit of leeway. The alternative when someone does that is to make what was voluntary subject to laws. It's too bad, and it's sad the GOP had adopted the attitude, if Trump does it we must always defend it, if nothing else to own the libs.

At any rate, I was responding to your comment with my opinion. If you think being ignorant about a President's financial situation is good policy, I do not agree.
Click to expand...

Craps on norms and traditions? People don't have a clue what a tax return shows. The only reason they want to see his returns is to continue with the pathetic crap fest they have been instructed to swallow every day.

Or we could change the law? There is no law that could be changed that wouldn't be unconstitutional. The Constitution lays out the requirements for someone seeking the office of President. It doesn't mention tax returns.

Look what the left is doing today. How often has the "Hatch Act" been brought up?

Consider this from 2014:

Running for Office: The Hatch Act is Nearly Dead - Coates' Canons Coates' Canons

What gets me is how this short term group frenzy emotionalism will play out in the future. There never seems to be an understanding of the slippery slope, or unintended consequences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom