The Truth About Obama! - Page 2 - Politics and Economics

Two Plus Two Forums Other Topics Politics

The Truth About Obama!

...

Page 2 of 2

1 2

Page 2 of 2

1 2

01-15-2008 , 10:59 AM

#26

manbearpig

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 3,754

Quote:

Originally Posted by pvn

Why should that stuff be excluded? We're talking about his ability to make money, right? Cutting deals is just as valid as any other method imo.

Stealing from people is just as valid as any other method, amirite?

01-15-2008 , 11:02 AM

#27

manbearpig

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 3,754

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bedreviter

You can say whatever you want, but I still think Low Key´s statement "I thought he ran all his business ventures into the ground.. But lots of family money sure." is pretty far off.

Agreed, kind of. His 2% stake in one business venture can be considered a success. Although there is no doubt a lot of the growth was due to his presence in the organization. How much of it was "business sense" versus how much of it was him being from a powerful and wellk known family I don't know.

But it is unfair to say that he ran every business venture of his into the ground.

01-15-2008 , 11:06 AM

#28

ikestoys

banned

Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 94,424

Quote:

Originally Posted by manbearpig

Stealing from people is just as valid as any other method, amirite?

did he hold a gun to his head when he signed the contract? or are you just ranting?

01-15-2008 , 11:24 AM

#29

manbearpig

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 3,754

Quote:

Originally Posted by ikestoys

did he hold a gun to his head when he signed the contract? or are you just ranting?

Not talking about the contract. Thats fine. If you can make an extra 10% good on you.

I am talking about all the tax shenanigans involved in the deal.

Quote:

A review of George W. Bush’s 1998 tax return reveals that he reported the sale of his share of the Texas Rangers baseball team as a long term capital gain. As a result, he paid a tax on the more than $15 million proceeds at a tax rate of 20%, as opposed to the 39.6% rate on ordinary income.

Quote:

According to IRS Revenue Procedure 93-27, “…The receipt of a partnership capital interest for services provided to or for the benefit of the partnership is taxable as compensation.” As most people know, compensation is taxed as ordinary income, subject to the highest tax rates; in this case 39.6%. Mr. Bush treated the incentive portion of his proceeds as long term capital gain, and accordingly reduced his tax liability by at least $2.4 million.

He owned a piece of Crescent when he proposed this bill.

Quote:

“The tax reform bill supported by Gov. George W. Bush would have saved at least $2.5 million in school property tax for a company founded by Bush’s billionaire business partner and top campaign contributor, Richard Rainwater of Fort Worth.”

Quote:

As if that was not enough, Bush’s policies as governor further benefited Crescent by:

1. Allowing it to receive an extra $10 million stadium tax for a sports stadium used by the Dallas Mavericks
2. The State of Texas sold three office blocks belonging to the teachers’ retirement fund—to Crescent—the sale of one block costing the pension fund system $44 million.
3. The trust fund for the Texas University Public School invested $20 million in Crescent during Bush’s first term as governor.

I seriously don't know why this particular line of conversation is continuing. It is pretty clear that W used his family and political standing to benefit this particular business deal, which on the surface is fine. However, a closer look reveals that a lot of the benefits he brought to the table at least bordered on corruption. Agree?

01-15-2008 , 11:54 AM

#30

pvn

Guest

Posts: n/a

Quote:

Originally Posted by manbearpig

Stealing from people is just as valid as any other method, amirite?

Was there stealing involved in that deal? Outside of the "normally accepted" stuff like taxpayer funding (which I'm sure Low Key doesn't object to on principle, unless I've missed something).

01-15-2008 , 03:13 PM

#31

manbearpig

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 3,754

Quote:

Originally Posted by pvn

Was there stealing involved in that deal? Outside of the "normally accepted" stuff like taxpayer funding (which I'm sure Low Key doesn't object to on principle, unless I've missed something).

Not really stealing. I was more replying to this comment of yours than anything specific about the deal.

Quote:

Cutting deals is just as valid as any other method imo.

01-15-2008 , 03:45 PM

#32

Bedreviter

veteran

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 2,502

Quote:

Originally Posted by Low Key

Ok, he may have had one successful business deal. But I was under the impression that he'd run some oil companies into the ground, among other ventures. If this is not the case, let me know. But as it stands now, only pointing out the Rangers makes me think this was the aberration to the usual bad business.

Im far from an expert on this, but as I understand it GWB started up 1 oil-company (Arbusto Energy in 1979) that was far from a success, and later sold that company to Spectrum 7 which later was merged into Harken Energy. Bush was CEO of Spectrum 7 and after the merger became a director of Harken.

None of the companies were run into the ground, and even if they had they certainly would not have been alone in doing so after the 1979 energy crisis.

Oil and Gas exploration can be a pretty unsafe area, and not being successful with that one company you start in that field does not necessarily say much of the competence of the owner.

And from what I understand GWB ended his total -involvements with a profit.

So he started up one company that was not a success, and he was very successful with Rangers... so 1-1?

01-15-2008 , 06:58 PM

#33

NasEscobar

grinder

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 652

Quote:

Originally Posted by DVaut1

I don't know; isn't the opposite true? Don't alot of people come to the Beltway already pretty rich?

I'm also of the mind that politics is a little like poker: yeah, it can be very profitable to pursue professionally for a small few, but anyone who can make a career out of politics and turn it into a big money proposition probably could have done the same numerous other ways.

Let's think of the major political figures who could reasonably expect to make serious money from their life in politics: President Bush already had plenty of family money and business ventures to keep him comfortable

Bush's business ventures all failed with the exception of the Rangers which he used emminent domain to make his millions.

The US has over a hundred year history of people high in business using the government to get corporate welfare, favorable regulations, government contracts, favorable tax codes, tariffs, duties, etc. It's not about getting rich as much as it is getting richer.

01-17-2008 , 03:13 AM

#34

spaceman Bryce

anything you guys want

Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 21,015

Hillary Truth

Hillary Clinton has the same last name as the 42nd president of the united states. Coincidence? NO. In fact Hillary had sex with Bill Clinton one time and is rumored to have a child named chelsea.Yes thats right, Hillary clinton has a vagina and hangs out with shady politicians. Is that the kind of misleading president we want?
Join us next time for Hillary truth 2 when we reveal her not so innocent past as an arkansas lawyer.