Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (451853)	1/28/2009 1:36:59 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575773

Bentway, > He had no way of knowing Obama would nominate him for the cabinet. He was "caught" by Obama's own vetting process, after the IRS "statute of limitations" had already passed on the "crime". - If the tax issue was out of neglect, then he has proven to be incompetent with his own finances. - If he meant to dodge the taxes, then he has proven to be incompetent by failing to inform Obama of the back taxes, or thinking that the issue was already behind him. - If he didn't have the chance to inform Obama, then Obama has proven to be incompetent by blindsiding him with the nomination before the "vetting" process was complete. I already have all your escape routes covered. ;-) Tenchusatsu

To: bentway who wrote (451853)	1/28/2009 3:01:20 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575773

He had no way of knowing Obama would nominate him for the cabinet. He was "caught" by Obama's own vetting process, after the IRS "statute of limitations" had already passed on the "crime". Obama thought that it was personally embarrassing for the G man, but otherwise, no big deal - which is the only opinion that really counts. Since he was nominated, he had to pay the taxes. So, he'll be charged with nothing. Nobody ever said he would be "charged" with anything. It isn't a crime to owe back taxes, ever. The issue isn't that a "mistake" was made or that originally it was an honest mistake (I believe it was). It isn't that the statute closed the returns. It is that our tax collection system is based on the "honor" system. And he chose not to honor the honor system. What kind of example does this set for other taxpayers? We have a huge problem with taxpayers "rationalizing" not paying their taxes anyway -- it is too complicated, it is too much, they'll never know, whatever -- and now you have the guy at the top violating the spirit of the process for all to see? No wonder people cheat on their taxes.