FAKE NEWS EXPOSED: A Service of PoliticalChat.com

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

I suppose when your Dear Leader is one of the biggest tax frauds in American history that you become pretty sensitive to tax law enforcement.

You got a scoop, Finn? The trial hasn't even started yet and he's been convicted? Amazing. Well, that's leftist justice for ya. I guess that's why you're such a big fan of Cheney's Star Chamber January 6th Committee. The hearing is just a formality. The findings have probably already been drafted.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

You got a scoop, Finn? The trial hasn't even started yet and he's been convicted? Amazing. Well, that's leftist justice for ya. I guess that's why you're such a big fan of Cheney's Star Chamber January 6th Committee. The hearing is just a formality. The findings have probably already been drafted.

Read the long NYT expose from last year based upon tax documents provided by Mary Trump. Besides Trump has been far more protective of his tax returns than of the our nuclear secrets. The Trump Organization and its CFO are going on trial in September. It'll be fun to see the depths of his depravity.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

:
Can you post me to any post where I stated anything like that?

WTF? In this very thread, you have responded "where'sthe fake news?" on multiple occasions when I showed Fox News' lies about Biden wanting to murder taxpayers.

[Chicks]

Poor Whell. I think he finally understands that his Dear Leader might have told a fib or two, lol.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by whell

Sure it is.



Can you post me to any post where I stated anything like that? Your skill at building straw men is unrivaled. Congrats, I guess.



By the way, you and others might be shocked to learn that not everyone agrees with you. One example:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/newsweek/

Overall, we rate Newsweek Left-Center Biased based on editorial positions that slightly favor the left. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and timely correction of errors. (5/18/2016) Updated (M. Huitsing 04/15/2022)

Even your mediabiasfactcheck website is a frothing fake news source. Thanks for the chuckles, Mike.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Bias/Fact_Check

[whell]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

You continue to conflate the scary "IRS police" with the whole IRS, I notice.

BTW, do you have actual numbers on how much the law enforcement arm of the IRS is being expanded? Of course you don't, no one does. Any job announcements out now were based on previous planning, not the new funding.

I also note you just come back punching, completely shrugging off the wreck of your 'what fake news?' narrative.

No, we don't know that yet. All we know is that they currently have about 2100 special agents, which is down from prior years.

We can make an intelligent estimate. The 2100 special agent population is about 2.6% of the IRS's current workforce. If the IRS is adding 87000 new employees, and we assume that 2.6% of the new employees will be special agents, that makes for an additional 2262 special agents (87000 * 0.026). That estimate would more than double the number of special agents, from 2100 to 4362 special agents.

Now, that being said, I will also say that with my job I do work with the IRS - and various other Federal agencies - several times per year, either directly or in partnership with clients. Of all the agencies that I work with, the IRS is probably among the most "customer-friendly". Remember that we're talking about government agencies so that "customer-friendly" bar is set pretty low. Overall, I think the IRS has had some success with a multi-year effort to try to be less onerous.

They still have a long way to go, and like any other government agency, they are prone to excessiveness. It's not hard to find stories about the IRS's history of abuse, and the potential politicization of the IRS by both parties.

As for the "Fake News" narrative, you may notice that I've not commented on that narrative once in this thread, other than posting a link to the Newsweek story about the IRS editing the initial job posting. This notwithstanding efforts by some here to put words in my mouth.

Am I in favor of expanding the IRS? Hell no. The IRS is a remnant of a bygone era, where government foot soldiers were needed to canvas the kingdom and shake down the peasants for their tax payments. In the 21st century, we don't need a giant apparatus to do that. But the geniuses in DC or state capitols can't conceptualize any alternatives to the status quo, nor are they willing to risk blowback (or loss of campaign contributions) from unions if the IRS, or other government agencies, were reconstituted and modernized.

Do I favor the IRS having more agents with firearms? See above. Also, Inspector General reporting suggests the IRS gives special agents guns but doesn't train them on proper use and security of those weapons. Not a happy thought.

As to the specifics of who these new agents might go after, I can only tell you what I've seen. Other government enforcement agencies (i.e., the Department of Labor) used to primarily target larger businesses, largely because they had the biggest pockets, and required fewer resources to extract proportionately larger fines.

However, once those departments received additional funding, they increasingly pursued cases against smaller businesses as an increasing proportion of their total caseload. The rationale was simple: more targets, less sophisticated ability to defend themselves, higher likelihood to pay the fine versus dispute the case for an extended period of time, and ultimately less costly for the agency to prosecute the case.

That's my concern about where the IRS might decide to go with their expanded agency: toward the middle class. Sure, the top 1% control most of the wealth (when counting both liquid and non-liquid assets), but it's not that easy to collect from these folks and they're able to execute all available strategies for tax avoidance/tax reduction. Middle class: less wealth, but it's easier to get at and less costly to collect.

Are IRS agents going to be walking around shooting folks with all their new special agents? I doubt it. And based on the Inspector General report, it would seem more likely that they'd end up shooting each other or themselves.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

WTF? In this very thread, you have responded "where'sthe fake news?" on multiple occasions when I showed Fox News' lies about Biden wanting to murder taxpayers.

Yes, I asked that question and I gave two options to choose from: 1) Is it fake news that the IRS had a job posting listing the willingness to use deadly force as a qualification? Or 2), is if fake news that the IRS modified their job posting to remove that qualification?

You brought up the Fox News rant. I never commented on that other than to post the link to Newsweek, which provided some background on what the rant might be about.

You then went off about all the brilliant insight you have based on what your Atlanta cousin told you. I never commented on that either. The job posting and its later modification were all I've referred to in this part of the thread.
But that didn't stop you from injecting lore about the Whiskey Rebellion and other historical nuggets which had nothing to do with the wording in the job posting. Nor did it stop you from suggesting that I don't know what I'm talking about....I guess since I don't know your cousin?

Finn, you're very much a politician in these threads, in as much as you want to in ways that you think make you look intelligent. You also accused me of agreeing with the notion that the IRS is going to go out and kill taxpayers. Never once did I post anything like that, but that didn't slow you down from making that accusation at all. Your words:

And you're still contending that Fox News asserting that these agents will be tasked by "Joe Biden ... to hunt down and kill middle class taxpayers that don't pay enough" isn't fake news? You're one sick, delusional puppy who simply isn't willing to admit that your parroted wingnut news isn't true.

You're not all that interested in what I think. You're more interested in making me a straw man. Am I complaining? No, it comes with the territory. Just point out that you might want to slow down a bit and maybe actually converse rather than make assumptions and hurl accusations.

[whell]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Even your mediabiasfactcheck website is a frothing fake news source. Thanks for the chuckles, Mike.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Bias/Fact_Check

You're very welcome. Interesting that it's a product of someone who thinks more like you than me. But hey, reflexively dismissing is your special skill, not mine.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Chicks

Poor Whell. I think he finally understands that his Dear Leader might have told a fib or two, lol.

You consistently demonstrate how little you do understand about me. lol!

[Oerets]

_______