Trump suggest work around for funding Ukraine

[Luvnit2]

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/trump-suggested-workable-novel-way-help-ukraine-consider

Trump suggest we loan Ukraine money using a cost basis for any weapons we give them and any money to fund their war with Ukraine. As a nation, we can't just keep giving countries hundreds of billions of dollars and watch our deficit spiral out of control.

Trump suggests a no interest loan and also suggest no repayment unless Ukraine strikes it rich.

Take off your political bias hat, is this a good idea or not?

[GMDino]

(03-07-2024, 01:20 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/trump-suggested-workable-novel-way-help-ukraine-consider

Trump suggest we loan Ukraine money using a cost basis for any weapons we give them and any money to fund their war with Ukraine. As a nation, we can't just keep giving countries hundreds of billions of dollars and watch our deficit spiral out of control.

Trump suggests a no interest loan and also suggest no repayment unless Ukraine strikes it rich.

Take off your political bias hat, is this a good idea or not?

Can they just declare bankruptcy and not pay us back?  I've heard that's a great business model. 

Maybe if he wins he can get that through.  In the meantime the people were are already in office need to come up with a solution.

[Luvnit2]

(03-07-2024, 01:40 PM)GMDino Wrote: Can they just declare bankruptcy and not pay us back?  I've heard that's a great business model. 

It only took you minutes to violate forum rules by attempting to derail a thread.

Sad, you just can't take off your political hat and answer a simple question. 

We need solutions to offer up to our current/future leaders. Trusting the right decision will be made is naive at best.

What is your solution for funding Ukraine? Does debt and our deficit mean anything to you?

[GMDino]

(03-07-2024, 01:58 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: It only took you minutes to violate forum rules by attempting to derail a thread.

Sad, you just can't take off your political hat and answer a simple question. 

We need solutions to offer up to our current/future leaders. Trusting the right decision will be made is naive at best.

What is your solution for funding Ukraine? Does debt and our deficit mean anything to you?

I asked a question.

Then I gave my opinion.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-07-2024, 01:58 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: It only took you minutes to violate forum rules by attempting to derail a thread.

Sad, you just can't take off your political hat and answer a simple question. 

We need solutions to offer up to our current/future leaders. Trusting the right decision will be made is naive at best.

What is your solution for funding Ukraine? Does debt and our deficit mean anything to you?

Sarcasm is not against forum rules.  Don't be like them and whine about every single little thing, be better.  I'm not your dad so I'll leave it at that.

[Luvnit2]

(03-07-2024, 02:13 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Sarcasm is not against forum rules.  Don't be like them and whine about every single little thing, be better.  I'm not your dad so I'll leave it at that.

I was being sarcastic Dad.

[SunsetBengal]

(03-07-2024, 02:33 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: I was being sarcastic Dad.

We don't need a countdown, just take the picture.. 

[CKwi88]

(03-07-2024, 01:58 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: It only took you minutes to violate forum rules by attempting to derail a thread.

Sad, you just can't take off your political hat and answer a simple question. 

We need solutions to offer up to our current/future leaders. Trusting the right decision will be made is naive at best.

What is your solution for funding Ukraine? Does debt and our deficit mean anything to you?

The sarcasm was certainly the first thought that popped into my head to. I'm sure Trump proposed it this way because hey, getting favorable loan terms and then refusing to pay it back worked for him so why not Ukraine?

But at the same time, it's what would happen anyways. Instead of giving them money, we'll give it to them in the form of an interest-free loan. OK, cool. How will Ukraine pay it back? Simple answer: they won't. They won't be able to. So then what? Are we going to engage in debt-trap diplomacy like China? Invade Ukraine ourselves? Or just forgive it anyways? Trump's idea just makes it seem more palatable to maga folks and the "America First" crowd.

We're already getting great return on our investment by alienating Russia on the world stage and setting them back decades. 

[GMDino]

(03-07-2024, 02:38 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: The sarcasm was certainly the first thought that popped into my head to. I'm sure Trump proposed it this way because hey, getting favorable loan terms and then refusing to pay it back worked for him so why not Ukraine?

But at the same time, it's what would happen anyways. Instead of giving them money, we'll give it to them in the form of an interest-free loan. OK, cool. How will Ukraine pay it back? Simple answer: they won't. They won't be able to. So then what? Are we going to engage in debt-trap diplomacy like China? Invade Ukraine ourselves? Or just forgive it anyways? Trump's idea just makes it seem more palatable to maga folks and the "America First" crowd.

We're already getting great return on our investment by alienating Russia on the world stage and setting them back decades. 

All of this.

He considers himself a successful businessman because he knows how to work the system.  Not paying taxes is "smart".  Not paying contractors because he didn't like the work is fair.

So his plan to loan money only makes sense because he expects everyone ELSE to play by the rules and pay.  Like NATO, for example.

And since that likely won't happen...the idea is moot.

[masonbengals fan]

I've often wondered why this money isn't loaned instead of gifted. Not just Ukraine but a significant portion of the foreign aid being dispersed by our Federal government to any foreign entity.

There are of course exceptions, but a lot of these places should absolutely pay our country back.

We have to borrow this money. There is NO reserve to draw from.

[*pally*]

Loaning it to someone with no interest and no clear repayment plan is a gift. Calling it by another name is just changing the name;

[Luvnit2]

(03-07-2024, 02:38 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: The sarcasm was certainly the first thought that popped into my head to. I'm sure Trump proposed it this way because hey, getting favorable loan terms and then refusing to pay it back worked for him so why not Ukraine?

But at the same time, it's what would happen anyways. Instead of giving them money, we'll give it to them in the form of an interest-free loan. OK, cool. How will Ukraine pay it back? Simple answer: they won't. They won't be able to. So then what? Are we going to engage in debt-trap diplomacy like China? Invade Ukraine ourselves? Or just forgive it anyways? Trump's idea just makes it seem more palatable to maga folks and the "America First" crowd.

We're already getting great return on our investment by alienating Russia on the world stage and setting them back decades. 

I suggest you read the article provided. It explains Ukraine only pays it back if they strike it rich, simply they would not have to pay it back unless their country recovers financially.

[Luvnit2]

(03-07-2024, 03:21 PM)pally Wrote: Loaning it to someone with no interest and no clear repayment plan is a gift.  Calling it by another name is just changing the name;

That is an interesting take, do you have the same thought in relation to Hunter Biden being loaned money by the dude from Hollywood or Jim and Joe Biden loans?

If so, a gift is taxable about 17.500 a year received by anyone. 

The key in this case of it is not a straight gift is because a legal document with terms would be created and used to determine repayment, maybe never, maybe many years from now Ukraine would be in a position to repay it.

[*pally*]

(03-07-2024, 03:26 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: That is an interesting take, do you have the same thought in relation to Hunter Biden being loaned money by the dude from Hollywood or Jim and Joe Biden loans?

If so, a gift is taxable about 17.500 a year received by anyone. 

The key in this case of it is not a straight gift is because a legal document with terms would be created and used to determine repayment, maybe never, maybe many years from now Ukraine would be in a position to repay it.

That's aninteresting take...not a good one but interesting

Whether you like it or not...the Hollywood guy testified under oath that he loaned the money to Hunter Biden with expectations that he would be paid back.

Yes, by the technical letter of the law,  Joe should have charged interest but as you know interfamily short-term loans often skip some formalities. Based on testimony the loan was repaid in less than 2 months.  So the money wasn't a gift so no tax liability there and at a time when interest rates for short-term loans were less than 2%.  So a 2-month long $200,000 loan at 2% annual interest equals to about $500 of uncharged interest

[*Nately120*]

(03-07-2024, 01:58 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Does debt and our deficit mean anything to you?

Yes, but I saw guys like Ron Paul and Gary Johnson get thrown out of the party in preference to culture warrior debt-growers, so seeing that we weren't going to get a viable choice in regards to managing or shrinking the debt I had to let it go.  Can't obsess over things you can't change. 

[CKwi88]

(03-07-2024, 03:22 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: I suggest you read the article provided. It explains Ukraine only pays it back if they strike it rich, simply they would not have to pay it back unless their country recovers financially.

Ah yes, if they "strike it rich!". 

What a wonderfully objective and quantifiable scale to measure it by. It's empty talk. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-07-2024, 02:33 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: I was being sarcastic Dad.

If I were a more cynical man I'd press X to doubt here.  But I'll take you at your word.

[Luvnit2]

(03-07-2024, 04:18 PM)pally Wrote: That's aninteresting take...not a good one but interesting

Whether you like it or not...the Hollywood guy testified under oath that he loaned the money to Hunter Biden with expectations that he would be paid back.

Yes, by the technical letter of the law,  Joe should have charged interest but as you know interfamily short-term loans often skip some formalities. Based on testimony the loan was repaid in less than 2 months.  So the money wasn't a gift so no tax liability there and at a time when interest rates for short-term loans were less than 2%.  So a 2-month long $200,000 loan at 2% annual interest equals to about $500 of uncharged interest

2% loans are not the fair market value for a loan by a relative of friend for a long time. 

Personal loans from a bank bear higher risk for. the bank, thus if the rate for a car is 6%, likely 8 to 10% is considered fair by IRS standards. 

The Hollywood guy produced no loan papers to Congress detailing the loan terms. Joe Biden has failed to give Congress the loan papers for his loans with Jim or Hunter.

Where did you get the guy from Hollywood issued Hunter a short term loan? No loan papers and he testified Hunter may not have to pay it back. 

He loanded him 5 million dollars,using your 2% (too low), iinteret per years would be $100,000 dollars. A far cry from $500 you claim.

[Luvnit2]

(03-07-2024, 05:14 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: Ah yes, if they "strike it rich!". 

What a wonderfully objective and quantifiable scale to measure it by. It's empty talk. 

Unlike Joe's loan to relatives, Trump would have loan papers drawn up with more specific terms. But, to play devil's advocate, it would be Ukraine to benefit if the term was "strike it rich", not the US treasury.