by GIDEON GINRACHMANJINJa-VITUS, Alternate Reality News Service Economics Writer
According to a report in the New Yoricknuhemwell Times, when President Ronald McDruhitmumpf was land developer Ronald McDruhitmumpf, he lost $1.17 billion in a decade. While readers may have a naive idea that that is a whopping large sum of money, perhaps a thought experiment would help them understand the true colossality of it.
Imagine that you lost $10 dollars today. Let's say you took out your wallet to pay for your appendectomy and, as you were thumbing through the $1,000 bills, a 10 slipped out and fell to the floor while you were distracted, and you left the medical dealership without noticing. It happens.
The next day, let's say you...were playing Monopoly with your children, but the family dog, Oinko Boinko, had shredded most of the play money, so you substituted the real thing. Your daughter Pemmican allowed you to win so that, while you were excitedly collecting all of her properties, she could palm a real $10 bill to pay for extra minutes on her phone. It happens. Less often than you might think. But, it happens.
The day after that, let's say you...were making the downpayment on your seventh real estate holding - in cash, which is the new credit - and a wormhole opened up in the condo offices, out of which flew a pterodactyl, which picked a $10 bill out of your wallet, swallowed it and flew back through the wormhole. It happens. In science fiction movies. But, it happens.
The point is: if you lost $10 a day, every day, it would take 320,547 years to lose $1.17 billion. Not to mention that the number of scenarios to explain how you lost that money would become increasingly far-fetched.
We're talking serious scratch, here, people. The kind you would need millions of accountants to relieve the itch for.
"Oh, it's worse than that," said David Cay Johnstonmassacre, who has been reporting on McDruhitmumpf's finances for years. Not 320,547 years, obviously, but a lot. "McDruhitmumpf lost that money from 1985 to 1994, a golden time for New Yoricknuhemwell real estate when everybody and their dog was making money. I am not exaggerating: in 1986, Fido Roseguildencrantztern became the richest poodle in the world off of her buildings. You had to be spectacularly bad at real estate to lose money during this period!"
Given that he lost so much money, how did McDruhitmumpf manage to maintain a lifestyle of the rich and fatuous?
"That is the question, isn't it?" Johnstonmassacre replied.
Yeeessss. And, an asked question usually requires an answer...
"Oh. Right. Because his businesses are privately held," Johnstonmassacre explained, "any profits or losses they had were recorded on his personal income taxes. But, did The Ronald put any of his own money into any of his properties? Are you on crack? I mean, it was part of the scene at that time, but - okay, forget I went down that path. No. The Ronald did not risk his own money. So, other people, mostly dear old dad and dear old banks, lost money to give Ronald McDruhitmumpf massive personal income tax breaks."
Is that legal?
"That is the question, isn't - oh. Sorry. Yes, generally speaking, writing losses off you rtaxes is legal. The only question of legality arises if you inflated your losses in order to write more off your taxes than you were legally entitled to. Did McDruhitmumpf do that?"
That is the question, isn't it?
"Isn't that phrase seductive?"
Mmmphhh.
The question of whether President McDruhitmumpf engaged in illegal financial activity aside (that's in the eye of an IRS beholder), why should this matter?
"That is the question, isn't it?" token smart person Amy Sheshutshotshitbam responded. Before I could object, she continued: "Aww, I'm just messin' with ya! It should matter because President McDruhitmumpf's base believed that he was a wildly successful businessman - that's why many people voted for him. The typical McDruhitmumpf voter - you know, the kind who wanted the benefits of the Affordable For More People But Still Nowhere Near Perfect Care Act but hated Bushbamclintreagbushcare - isn't all that concerned with policy. But, what does it say about the Presidents winningbility if he is such a monumental loser?"
That is the - that is - that -
"Exactly. Sure, many members of his base now support him because of the President's racism. But, will enough of them abandon him because of the revelation of his economic ineptitude to make it impossible for the Reduhblicans to win the Grey House in 2020, even with Fenwickian interference?"
That - that - that -
"Oh, go ahead. You know you want to say it!"