This was from 1980-1994 (age 14-28) and never really thought about it at the time. For the last 8 of those years I had about 70plus yards to cut, plus other landscaping work. I also worked at DHL & the Post Office during this time and I justified it, that I paid enough to support a bunch of "deadbeats" that weren't willing to work as hard as me.

 

Some might not agree with this, but that was many years ago.

 

You say this was years ago as if to dismiss it, but you mentioned clearly in your first post that you are not ashamed of it.

 

FWIW, I understand making mistakes. I have made my share.

I don't agree with either premise. But...I do feel that the issue of illegals is a fuzzy subject, because I can't figure out how sources get solid statistics on people circumventing the laws. On the other hand, there is quite a bit of documentation recently regarding Swiss bank accounts and off shore funds, as well as action against many for avoiding the IRS. And we also know it's not over, that there are still people/corporations doing it.

 

 

So, in the end, I agree with neither illegals recpeiving benefits, nor avoiding the IRS in any manner. However, until there's some solid source with credible documentation regarding illegals receiving benefits, I am skeptical that it's as prevelant as some like to present it.

 

I don't think there's any more credible documentation of IRS avoidance than there is of illegals receiving benefits.

Question that arises for me....isn't avoiding paying taxes just as detrimental to this country as an illegal receiving benefits?

 

Yes.

I don't think there's any more credible documentation of IRS avoidance than there is of illegals receiving benefits.

 

My question, though, is...how do they know illegals are the culprit, versus legals? If an illegal is obtaining false documentation, it's likely much easier to track their income than illegals who are paid cash. Also how many illegals are paid cash and never attempt to receive benefits. There are some things missing from this broad leap, IMO.

I don't agree with either premise. But...I do feel that the issue of illegals is a fuzzy subject, because I can't figure out how sources get solid statistics on people circumventing the laws. On the other hand, there is quite a bit of documentation recently regarding Swiss bank accounts and off shore funds, as well as action against many for avoiding the IRS. And we also know it's not over, that there are still people/corporations doing it.

 

 

So, in the end, I agree with neither illegals recpeiving benefits, nor avoiding the IRS in any manner. However, until there's some solid source with credible documentation regarding illegals receiving benefits, I am skeptical that it's as prevelant as some like to present it.

Off shore accounts are legal... Illegals soaking the system is not.. Big Difference.

Off shore accounts are legal... Illegals soaking the system is not.. Big Difference.

 

So, you're ok if people look to avoid paying taxes by moving their money into acconts that are tax free?

My question, though, is...how do they know illegals are the culprit, versus legals? If an illegal is obtaining false documentation, it's likely much easier to track their income than illegals who are paid cash. Also how many illegals are paid cash and never attempt to receive benefits. There are some things missing from this broad leap, IMO.

 

It's all an estimate, in both cases. They have certain figures they track and then they extrapolate and perform trend analysis and all kinds of other statistical analysis. That's why some of those mathmeticians and actuaries make the big bucks.

It's all an estimate, in both cases. They have certain figures they track and then they extrapolate and perform trend analysis and all kinds of other statistical analysis. That's why some of those mathmeticians and actuaries make the big bucks.

 

Maybe because my job IS statistics, I'm more skeptical than many. I know the secrets of stats.

So, you're ok if people look to avoid paying taxes by moving their money into acconts that are tax free?

 

I'm ok with anyone using legal methods to avoid taxes. I would also love to see a bunch of tax loopholes closed.

I'm ok with anyone using legal methods to avoid taxes. I would also love to see a bunch of tax loopholes closed.

 

At least you want to see those loopholes closed. I hate the argument "well it's legal", as if it's the be all.

So, you're ok if people look to avoid paying taxes by moving their money into acconts that are tax free?

 

I have zero problem with anyone doing ANYTHING that is legal to reduce their tax burden and their should be no vilification for it. Our esteemed congress at one time enacted every loophole that exists and some president or other signed them into law.

 

That said I also have no problem with some of those loopholes being closed.

 

We have a congressman here that makes a big deal (and a photo op) about donating his entire congressional salary to charity. Would you have a problem if he wrote that amount off on his taxes? The only problem I would have with it is that he is one of the staunchest supporters of tax increases on "the rich" so I see it being very hypocritical on one hand wanting top raise taxes while on the otehr doing anything to keep from paying "his fair share".

 

On a side-bar should his opponent in this election demand that he release his tax records?

I have zero problem with anyone doing ANYTHING that is legal to reduce their tax burden and their should be no vilification for it. Our esteemed congress at one time enacted every loophole that exists and some president or other signed them into law.

 

That said I also have no problem with some of those loopholes being closed.

 

We have a congressman here that makes a big deal (and a photo op) about donating his entire congressional salary to charity. Would you have a problem if he wrote that amount off on his taxes? The only problem I would have with it is that he is one of the staunchest supporters of tax increases on "the rich" so I see it being very hypocritical on one hand wanting top raise taxes while on the otehr doing anything to keep from paying "his fair share".

 

On a side-bar should his opponent in this election demand that he release his tax records?

 

 

John Yarmuth. He has a name. I have no problem if he's asked to release his tax records. I'll have to double check, but I think he's done so in the past.

What about his tax deductions? would you have a problem if he LEGALLY used his donation to reduce his tax burden and not pay "his fair share", a term he love to throw around.

I have zero problem with anyone doing ANYTHING that is legal to reduce their tax burden and their should be no vilification for it. Our esteemed congress at one time enacted every loophole that exists and some president or other signed them into law.

 

That said I also have no problem with some of those loopholes being closed.

 

We have a congressman here that makes a big deal (and a photo op) about donating his entire congressional salary to charity. Would you have a problem if he wrote that amount off on his taxes? The only problem I would have with it is that he is one of the staunchest supporters of tax increases on "the rich" so I see it being very hypocritical on one hand wanting top raise taxes while on the otehr doing anything to keep from paying "his fair share".

 

On a side-bar should his opponent in this election demand that he release his tax records?

 

 

I can't find any reports of him releasing his returns. I did, find, however, that he returned his entier post tax congressional salary.

What about his tax deductions? would you have a problem if he LEGALLY used his donation to reduce his tax burden and not pay "his fair share", a term he love to throw around.

 

Since he donated his post tax salary, the point is moot.