Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
I mean, obviously tax fraud is tax fraud, but it is fraud against a bank to lie to a bank. McDonald’s can’t lie to you to sell you a hamburger and Trump can’t lie to people to get investors. Separate issues than tax fraud.
The question in the lawsuit is… is the photograph really lying? the judge or whoever in that trial decided that reasonable people would not look at a photo advert and assume the burger would be exactly like that photo- which is reasonably assumed to be doctored to look more appetizing than it normally would be. In part, because taking pictures of food is actually difficult, things get cold, dry out. get disgusting pretty quickly.
but at no point did any one say they were selling you a 1/3 pound beef patty and actually sell a 1/4 pound beef patty- or a patty made of something other than beef. In short, it was a stupid lawsuit. McDonalds does some genuinely awful things… but making nice-looking advertisements is not one of them.
Some folks are born silver spoon in hand
Lord, don't they help themselves
But when the taxman come to the door
Lord, the house lookin' like a rummage sale, yeah
Securing loans against inflated equity is fraud and problematic regardless still. It’s like if a normal person was to Photoshop bank statements and paychecks to secure a mortgage they didn’t qualify for. It’s fraud and it’s a felony.
If he also paid tax on those inflated value, then go right ahead.
It becomes problematic and fraudulent when you want to pick and choose.
I mean, obviously tax fraud is tax fraud, but it is fraud against a bank to lie to a bank. McDonald’s can’t lie to you to sell you a hamburger and Trump can’t lie to people to get investors. Separate issues than tax fraud.
A court just ruled they can in fact do that
not really. Not even close, actually.
The question in the lawsuit is… is the photograph really lying? the judge or whoever in that trial decided that reasonable people would not look at a photo advert and assume the burger would be exactly like that photo- which is reasonably assumed to be doctored to look more appetizing than it normally would be. In part, because taking pictures of food is actually difficult, things get cold, dry out. get disgusting pretty quickly.
but at no point did any one say they were selling you a 1/3 pound beef patty and actually sell a 1/4 pound beef patty- or a patty made of something other than beef. In short, it was a stupid lawsuit. McDonalds does some genuinely awful things… but making nice-looking advertisements is not one of them.
I said fraud, not tax fraud.
Some folks are born silver spoon in hand Lord, don't they help themselves But when the taxman come to the door Lord, the house lookin' like a rummage sale, yeahSecuring loans against inflated equity is fraud and problematic regardless still. It’s like if a normal person was to Photoshop bank statements and paychecks to secure a mortgage they didn’t qualify for. It’s fraud and it’s a felony.