Ope.
At a campaign stop last weekend in Milwaukee, Gov. Tony Evers’ part-time second-in-command and full-time Democrat candidate for U.S Senate brushed off being delinquent on his property taxes, but “who among us?”
Barnes blamed the distractions of campaigning for lieutenant governor in 2018 for his late payments on his Milwaukee condo property.
“And, you know, with property taxes, I was late paying them, you know? I was late paying them. Again, who among us?” Barnes said during the candidate meet-and-greet.
Here’s the video.
First thought was that he had did it again, which would be a big deal and a huge blunder. But re-hashing this old story now? Pffft…talk about a “nothingburger”, It’s about as relevant as Trump’s bankruptcies….or at least it would be if Mandala was late over four times with his payment.
That aside, it is somewhat humorous seeing the anti-gov’t/anti-tax crowd get all kinds of upset about an individual being late with a tax payment…goes to show how politics makes for some interesting pretzels, for sure.
Surely, P, you can reduce your “thought” to a bumper sticker?
>That aside, it is somewhat humorous seeing the anti-gov’t/anti-tax crowd get all kinds of upset about an individual being late with a tax payment.
Count me in that crowd. Few things anger me more than listening to those tax reduction commercials on TV. When some jackhole ‘customer’ says the tax company saved them $25,000 out of a $28,000 debt, what they really mean is that the customer got out of paying $25,000 in taxes that we will be making up in our taxes the next year.
And when some millionaire politicians pay a few hundred dollars in yearly taxes it falls in the same vein. What is paid by minions does not need to be paid by the ‘leaders’. I know that Barnes is not a (known) millionaire, but his salary is around $150k. If he only has $15,000 in net worth, I don’t think he should be controlling his money much less ours.
I understand that taxes are a necessary evil so I would not say I am anti-tax per se, but I am a big proponent of people paying a fair amount. Step 1, reduce the tax code by about 70,000 pages. That is about how much is dedicated exclusively to millionaires or greater and corporations.
>Step 1, reduce the tax code by about 70,000 pages. That is about how much is dedicated exclusively to millionaires or greater and corporations.
Sorry, Step 1 is actually… “If you’re a big Social Democrat, make sure you pay your fucking taxes on time…. COMRADE”. But hey, we hate taxes, so how dare we point out the Lt Governor not paying his allotted amount, right Penguido?
(Not the first time I wished for an edit-button…lol…must have left an open tag in there. Hopefully it won’t be too confusing for any hebetudinous folks who may be reading it, but if there are complaints then I will be happy to re-post it)
>What do you beleive a person’s net worth should be before voters are allowed to choose ’em to represent them?
I don’t know, but more than 10% of his one year salary. Is he living in his parent’s basement and spending 100k/year on blow? No he is buying property and yet his net worth in 2018 was less than 15k? Say there is nothing to see there all you like, your opinion is yours.
If the poor/lower-middle class are unfit to hold political office, then should they even be allowed to vote?
That said – $15k is what Barnes lists on the financial disclosure report as being in a savings account, not his entire net worth.
Yes, I know. Technically he listed his assets at between $5,005 and $75,000. I could not find an actual net worth and was making fun of it, not reporting the news. My statements had zero to do with limiting candidates because of wealth and had no relationship to my comment, it was about that I think he is hiding his assets and shows no transparency.
>Interesting theory. What do you beleive a person’s net worth should be before voters are allowed to choose ’em to represent them?
That was your non-sequitur, not mine.
???
You flat-out said you think his net worth is too low for him to be controlling our money…and then you answered my question about how much it should be by saying “more than 10% of his one year salary”.
Despite you now objecting, it is obviously a very relevant question and am truly puzzled as to why you are now running away from it after you already answered it. Did my latest response to your comment make you re-think your original opinion or something?
Unless you have additional information regarding his finances, that sounds like nothing more than baseless accusations & assumptions.
Fair Tax system is–by far–the most equitable. Therefore, it will NEVER happen.
Okay, maybe I need to explain my words. Sometimes I leave too much to the reader’s imagination, I know. My words:
>I know that Barnes is not a (known) millionaire, but his salary is around $150k. If he only has $15,000 in net worth, I don’t think he should be controlling his money much less ours.
That was not a comment on his net worth, it was a comment that if he was making 150k per year, but had assets equaling about $15k, he is either not being transparent or he is woefully profligate with his money. Either way, I am not sure (because of that) HE should be handling billions of other people’s money.
It did not mean in the least that anyone who actually had little money should not be allowed to hold office or vote. I am not running away from that, I never said it.
So my first comment on the subject was meant to imply that he was either profligate OR not transparent, not just poor. Being poor is not a bar from holding office save in reality where you need millions of dollars of personal wealth and/or backing. You said that and I disagree.
So you believe lack of personal wealth SHOULD be a bar from voting or holding office? Please elaborate.
Or he just put a down payment on his condo, thus draining most of his liquid cash, and primary residences are not included as part of the “net worth” (Which is exactly what happened, btw).
Nope, I do not beleive that at all.
I would be in favor of some sort of public funding for all candidates, but the details in most of those measures make me take pause.
>and primary residences are not included as part of the “net worth”
Can you share that rule, or guide? I’m very interested in how net worth is calculated. Especially when it comes to owned property.
primary residences are not included as part of the “net worth”
Jason, that’s a rule in Star Wars, since banks cannot perfect liens on other planets, you see.
>Or he just put a down payment on his condo, thus draining most of his liquid cash, and primary residences are not included as part of the “net worth”
I have never heard that owned property was not part of a net worth calculation. So a person with a paid off 30 million dollar home loses his livelihood and uses his savings to live on for a while could have a ‘legal’ net worth $1,000 for a year? If he then took out a $5 million dollar equity loan would he suddenly have a $5,001,000 net worth? Are 401ks and other retirement savings part of the definition of net worth or does Barnes just not have any of that either? Besides that, I thought I read that the big property buy was an investment not a primary home, but I could be wrong on that part.
> Interesting theory. What do you beleive a person’s net worth should be before voters are allowed to choose ’em to represent them?
>Despite you now objecting, it is obviously a very relevant question and am truly puzzled as to why you are now running away from it
You called your interpretation of my words where you seemed to have assumed that I did not think poor people should be allowed to hold office or vote both interesting and relevant. Why wouldn’t anyone assume that you have those beliefs? That is one of the most common forms of misunderstanding. People look at other people’s ideas and based on their own beliefs, misinterpret them to something they understand.
Of course, I understand that it was just you trying twist someone else’s words to evil for your own gratification as usual, but to a newbie, playing devil’s advocate sounds suspiciously like you could seriously hold some outlandish beliefs…
The form does not require a candidate to disclose his primary residence, nor a mortgage used for personal use.
https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2021/11/15/mandela-barnes-discloses-modest-savings-u-s-senate-financial-form/8592062002/
The Senate financial disclosure statements don’t require candidates to list their primary residence.</em
https://www.centralwinews.com/recordgleaner/2021/11/16/barnes-lacks-the-assets-of-main-opponents/?destination=star-news
The Senate financial disclosure statements don’t require candidates to list their primary residence
https://www.hngnews.com/lake_mills_leader/opinion/columns/article_eddee41a-e1d2-5793-afea-f9763f3d91ed.html
fuck off, troll
I asked what do you beleive a person’s net worth should be in order to run for office, to which you provided an answer. You later clarified that you weren’t talking about any random person but rather only applying it to this particular person, and once you cleared that up I let it go.
If you really wanna explain why you are holding this individual to a different standard than you would anyone else then please feel free to do so…but that really isn’t a convo I wanna have with you.
>fuck off, troll
My words:
> I know that Barnes is not a (known) millionaire, but his salary is around $150k. If he only has $15,000 in net worth, I don’t think he should be controlling his money much less ours.
There is zero reference to anyone else, yet from this sentence you generalized it to:
>Interesting theory. What do you beleive a person’s net worth should be before voters are allowed to choose ’em to represent them?
That is exactly the kind of ridiculously exaggerated question you often go to as a response to someone else’s comment so I stand by the statement: “Of course, I understand that it was just you trying twist someone else’s words to evil for your own gratification as usual…”
I am not the troll in this thread. I did not misrepresent your words at all, you badly twisted mine and even continued on after I more clearly explained myself. If you are telling the troll in this thread to fuck off, you are talking to yourself. And thanks for the info on primary residences, I honestly did not know and was asking.
>If you really wanna explain why you are holding this individual to a different standard than you would anyone else then please feel free to do so…but that really isn’t a convo I wanna have with you.
Cool, me neither.