Trump Is Reality TV, Mueller Is The Wire

[CoccoBill]

I'm only gonna do this one more time. You've gone off the rails to the point where you're either being deliberately stubborn, or monumentally stupid. Either way, continuing to argue with you will be fruitless.

Read again my original post. My point was all along to point out Trump supporters are more invested in their beliefs. If they turn out to be wrong, they may have voted for a bigoted corrupt charlatan. If Trump's opposers turn out to be wrong, they have to face the humiliation of being wrong but things are actually ok. See the difference? The fact that for several hundred lines now you've been trying to switch this into just me being biased and not seeing the greatness of his ways are to me proof of my point.

The value of his real-estate portfolio is not sketchy, anecdotal, or hearsay. His title, President of the United States, is not sketchy, anecdotal, or hearsay. So I really don't know how you can be undecided regarding Trump's level of success, or his political talents.

Again, this isn't about my level of decidedness, it's about yours. So what is the value of his real-estate portfolio and how much debt does he and the companies have? Surely you know the exact numbers since you're so convinced.

Speculate for me then....why was the crowd so enthusiastic? When Trump was running campaign rallies, this particular crowd rejected him. CPAC is the base of the republican base. It's the people that wanna suck Mitt Romney's jock strap. They've rejected Trump's campaign rally rhetoric. So logically....that should tell you that the content of this speech is alot more substantial than campaign rally rhetoric.

Nice but sadly unsuccessful attempt to again divert the conversation. You were asked which parts in it showed signs of intelligence, though I already decided to drop this issue, since we clearly differ on the definition of intelligence.

False. In fact the opposite is true. Trump is pretty much an experiment. He's unique in significant ways. If it doesn't work out, conservatives can just go back to their Jeb Bush-types and hold their own. On the other hand, democrats have bet everything on Trump being a failure. They are counting on resignation or impeachment. They lost this election because they had no message. That hasn't changed. The only message they seem to have is "Trump is a _______-ist"

Why are you switching the context to being about republican and democrat politicians, when we were talking about voters? You would not be trying to deliberately divert the topic, would you?

I am completely open to budging an inch. Possibly even a foot. Or a mile. I've presented the reasons that support my current position. If I am to budge, then I need to something more compelling than what I already have. Convince me? You haven't even attempted to debate any of these issues. You just want to ridicule me for having confidence in the authenticity of my perceptions.

You may be, it just doesn't look like that to me. And no I haven't tried to debate on the issues other than point out places where your supposed titanium alloy evidences have been less than airtight. It truly hasn't been about ridicule though, sorry if it has seemed that way. At least on a conscious level I've been doing this bona fide.

if it's not echo-chamber talk, then what else could it be? Your opinions ignore known truths. Furthermore, your description of my "pathos" is entirely erroneous. Supreme leader??? I'm not delusional. If you want to ridicule Trump....fine. Jokes are funny, as long as their jokes. But you're not joking. You really believe it's possible that the man is stupid, broke, and likely a traitor. The basis of your political thought process....is a joke.

Yes, this is where our opinions differ. I don't have a deep emotional or economic investment in Trump, so I can perhaps more freely entertain all possible options, not only the ones that cement my beliefs. You refuse to think it's possible he could have gotten this far by accident, fluke or questionable means, I get that. Meanwhile, for an outside observer, his continuous gaffes, the accusations of meddling and obstruction, the language he uses, the accusations of pretty much everyone round him calling him an idiot and on and on, while not being damning and convincing evidence, should at least make one wonder what the real deal is. If the only thought entering someone's mind in face of all that is that they are all 100% fake news, my diagnosis is a mild case of delusional LALALALAICANTHEARYOU and I'd prescribe one pill of healthy skepticism twice a day.

Your math is completely wrong. I did the math for Boost a while back. If you started with 200 million, earned 10% per year, and only paid capital gains taxes, you would have about 4 point something billion after 40 years. You've calculated double that number in 36 years. Not possible.

The S&P 500 didn't make 10%. And Trump probably paid some non-zero amount of business profits and personal income tax (much higher rate than capital gains). Oh, and I'm also pretty sure that Trump spent some money over the last 40 years. Fast food isn't free.

So ignore Trump for a minute and ask an objective 3rd party. Ask two even. Forbes or Bloomberg both estimate Trump's net worth around 4 billion. To reach that number, with a $200 million head start, you have to far exceed the market. And you have to do it consistently, over the long term. How can an ignoramus do that?

I think you may have forgotten to adjust for inflation.

https://www.vox.com/2015/9/2/9248963...ump-index-fund
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...trump-s-wealth

Who says it's unquestioning?? Trump says he's rich. I checked and it turns out that other, independent firms who specialize in estimate the wealth of private businessmen agree that Trump is filthy fucking rich.

Did these independent firms also estimate his debts? There is no doubt his name is on some pretty expensive buildings on prime estate, but how much does he actually own them, how much are they leveraged, what is his net worth? We don't know do we. Bloomberg seems to estimate it's close to $3bn, which certainly isn't bad if true. Personally I'm not as convinced though that I'd base my whole world view on that.

Easily the most ignorant thing you've said in this thread. And that's saying something.

Wow, thanks! If my most ignorant view has been that running a political campaign bares little resemblance to an aptitude test or an exam, I feel I'm doing pretty well.

I know, for a fact, he owns billions of dollars of tangible assets. He's really not worried where his next steak is coming from.

See but you don't know whether his debts exceed his holdings. You do realize it's possible to own something and still be up to your eyes in debt?

It's just occurred to me that you live in a place where its entirely possible that you've never interacted with a highly successful capitalist.

Oh an ad hominem? How would that fact, even if true, change anything about what we are talking about? What would those interactions be and what's the definition of a highly successful capitalist?

Trump became president for the same reason all 44 of his predecessors did. Personal ambition and patriotism.

And what has his personal ambitions for the past decades been?

Fuck this game. You don't get to play with the definition of words.

It isn't your privilege alone, deal with it.

Racist implies hatred and animus.

This is how long it took for you to start changing definitions again.

Oxford dictionary: A person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.
Cambrisge dictionary: someone who believes that other races are not as good as their own and therefore treats them unfairly
Merriam-Webster: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
Wikipedia: the belief in the superiority of one race over another, which often results in discrimination and prejudice towards people based on their race or ethnicity

None of the definitions require hatred or animus.

Not "grumpy grandpa" stuff. That's why being labeled a racist is one of the worst things that can happen to a politician or celebrity. Weaponizing that is wrong wrong wrong.

Fuck this game. You don't get to play with the definition of words.

When those protesters carry signs demanding the removal of a politician for racist ideology, they're not being honest. They're not outraged about "grumpy grandpa" stuff. But Trump isn't guilty of anything worse. So what's with the signs??

How is it that you always know what everyone is thinking.

[BananaStand]

My point was all along to point out Trump supporters are more invested in their beliefs. If they turn out to be wrong, they may have voted for a bigoted corrupt charlatan.

There is a mountian of objective evidence to suggest that this is an infintisimally small possibility. So small that those of us who deal with realism and practicality can write it off as a complete fantasy. I'm ready anytime you want to discuss any of that objective evidence. But I understand if you don't want to because it eviscerates your position. You're completely ignorant, and you know it. You're just hopelessly trying to disguise it as fanatical agnosticism.

If Trump's opposers turn out to be wrong, they have to face the humiliation of being wrong but things are actually ok. See the difference?

They have turned out to be wrong. Do you think things are ok now?

So what is the value of his real-estate portfolio

do your own research. I've posted on this recently, or just use your google machine. Just his assets within the city of New York are worth 1.6 billion. Just in NYC

and how much debt does he and the companies have? Surely you know the exact numbers since you're so convinced.

No I don't know the exact numbers. I don't need to. I have an accounting degree, a masters in business administration, and 20 years experience in corporate finance. I can be virtually certain that he doesn't have more debt than can be serviced by his business operations. Banks check that shit before and DURING a loan term.

You were asked which parts in it showed signs of intelligence

The part where he won over an intelligent crowd that used to hate his guts.

Why are you switching the context to being about republican and democrat politicians, when we were talking about voters?

Voters don't have political affiliations?????

You may be, it just doesn't look like that to me. And no I haven't tried to debate on the issues other than point out places where your supposed titanium alloy evidences have been less than airtight.

No, you've cited situations where your ignorance makes you agnostic.

Yes, this is where our opinions differ. I don't have a deep emotional or economic investment in Trump, so I can perhaps more freely entertain all possible options, not only the ones that cement my beliefs

.
Do you think it's possible that Trump made his fortune by illegally trafficking pterodactyls?? Are you entertaining that option as well?

You refuse to think it's possible he could have gotten this far by accident

Do you even get how much money a billion dollars is??

questionable means,

I never said this is impossible, but mountains of objective evidence suggest otherwise to the point where it's practical, reasonable, and sensible to discount the possibility to the point where it's not even worth discussing, or even mentioning unless and until some credible evidence is made known.

It's clear to me that you think this stuff because you just don't understand corporate finance. Trump has 500+ companies, that means auditors are looking at his books, probably 2000+ times per year, every year, for the last half century. If Trump was up to no good, he would literally have to be the premier mastermind of the last two millennium. I guess that's possible. It's odd that you think this is a possibility while also strongly advocating the possibility that Trump is a simpleton.

I get that. Meanwhile, for an outside observer, his continuous gaffes

I don't think he commits any more gaffes than any other politician. Are you keeping score? What logical basis are you using to ignore the non-gaffes?

the accusations of meddling and obstruction

Made up by democrats. Literally. That accusation was made by Christopher Steele, who is a known partisan, was fired from the FBI for misconduct, is on record making heavily anti-trump statements, and was paid by Hillary Clinton. Why in the world do you think his accusation is credible?

, the language he uses

,
That's one of the main reasons he got elected. Do you not get that???

the accusations of pretty much everyone round him calling him an idiot

"pretty much everyone"??? There you go again with your desperate juvenile arguments. "duh, everything". PFFFFFFFFT

Everyone who's left the white house or the Trump campaign has had nothing but glowing things to say about their time serving the Commander in Chief.

I think you may have forgotten to adjust for inflation.

Inflation is not part of this equation. Again, you misunderstand finance and you're trying to get educated by vox. Big mistake. Even the vox article though admits that Trump could only get there the easy way if he didn't pay management fees, didn't pay taxes, and never withdrew a cent. That's OBVIOUSLY not possible. You can't buy buildings, planes, and super model wives that way.

So...again...it's clear that Trump has outperformed the market, significantly, and consistently.

Did these independent firms also estimate his debts?

Yes. I can't read the bloomberg article you linked because it's behind a paywall. But the headline says that they reached their assessment based on his 92 page financial disclosures, which include debt.

There is no doubt his name is on some pretty expensive buildings on prime estate, but how much does he actually own them

Either 100% or enough that he can service his debts. That's no small accomplishment.

what is his net worth? We don't know do we.

Does it matter? Do you really doubt he's a billionaire? Isn't that enough?

Bloomberg seems to estimate it's close to $3bn, which certainly isn't bad if true. Personally I'm not as convinced though that I'd base my whole world view on that.

Why do you doubt Bloomberg? Forbes says its 4 billion. Do you doubt them? How much corroboration do you actually need?

Wow, thanks! If my most ignorant view has been that running a political campaign bares little resemblance to an aptitude test or an exam, I feel I'm doing pretty well.

I'm not sure how elections work in your shithole country, but here in America you're required to answer questions, declare your policy, and demonstrate an understanding of the issues in debates. Everything you say, every position you take, every sentiment you communicate is scrutinized more than the Zapruder film. You really wouldn't equate that to an aptitude test? You think it's all smooth-talk?? ARE YOU HIGH???

See but you don't know whether his debts exceed his holdings

YES I DO!! Yet again, just because you have no idea how corporate finance works, doesn't mean that you can fill in the blanks with sensational figments of your imagination. There is no plausible way he could accumulate that much debt.

And what has his personal ambitions for the past decades been?

Success

None of the definitions require hatred or animus.

For fucks sake....go look up hatred and animus.

[CoccoBill]

There is a mountian of objective evidence to suggest that this is an infintisimally small possibility. So small that those of us who deal with realism and practicality can write it off as a complete fantasy. I'm ready anytime you want to discuss any of that objective evidence. But I understand if you don't want to because it eviscerates your position. You're completely ignorant, and you know it. You're just hopelessly trying to disguise it as fanatical agnosticism.

Let's for the sake of the argument say that I'm completely enclosed in an echo chamber, in total denial of all observable facts in the universe and overall a pretty useless human being. Now, how does this change the fact that Trump supporters have more to lose in their beliefs compared to Trump opposers? There is no mountain of objective evidence, there's just suggestive information with murky details, and a whole shitload of speculation. Yet, you're absolutely convinced that you're 100% correct and everyone even entertaining any opposing views must be idiots or brainwashed.

No I don't know the exact numbers. I don't need to. I have an accounting degree, a masters in business administration, and 20 years experience in corporate finance. I can be virtually certain that he doesn't have more debt than can be serviced by his business operations.

Wow an appeal to authority, good for you! You seem to have expanded your mind-reading skills to include corporate finance. Impressive.

Banks check that shit before and DURING a loan term.

Which is the reason no one's ever heard of credit defaults.

The part where he won over an intelligent crowd that used to hate his guts.

Look at you grasping at straws.

Voters don't have political affiliations?????

Of course they do, but that doesn't make them politicians. Stop deflecting.

No, you've cited situations where your ignorance makes you agnostic.

I'm not the one rigidly holding a position one way or the other, you can stop making it sound like that's the case already.

Do you think it's possible that Trump made his fortune by illegally trafficking pterodactyls?? Are you entertaining that option as well?

I don't think it's impossible, I just see no reason to think that's the case. If there were public records, statements, news articles or other suggestions that it might be the case, I might think it should be looked into. You clearly wouldn't since you know Trump isn't into that shit.

Do you even get how much money a billion dollars is??

I never said this is impossible, but mountains of objective evidence suggest otherwise to the point where it's practical, reasonable, and sensible to discount the possibility to the point where it's not even worth discussing, or even mentioning unless and until some credible evidence is made known.

We have come to notice that's your opinion, yes.

It's clear to me that you think this stuff because you just don't understand corporate finance. Trump has 500+ companies, that means auditors are looking at his books, probably 2000+ times per year, every year, for the last half century. If Trump was up to no good, he would literally have to be the premier mastermind of the last two millennium. I guess that's possible. It's odd that you think this is a possibility while also strongly advocating the possibility that Trump is a simpleton.

Hyperbole and false premise. Did your business school teach you that auditors look at corporate finances to find out if they're making enough profits to claim their owner is a billionaire, and call the press if they don't? Stop trolling with these inane suggestions.

I don't think he commits any more gaffes than any other politician. Are you keeping score? What logical basis are you using to ignore the non-gaffes?

I'm sure you don't. What are these non-gaffes I'm ignoring? Why are you still trying to divert this discussion to being about my opinions, which I still haven't even for the most part stated? Desperation?

Made up by democrats. Literally. That accusation was made by Christopher Steele, who is a known partisan, was fired from the FBI for misconduct, is on record making heavily anti-trump statements, and was paid by Hillary Clinton. Why in the world do you think his accusation is credible?

You think they're made up, you have absolutely no way of knowing for sure, no matter how much you claim you have a mountain of objective evidence. And stop putting words in my mouth, I have never said that. In my personal opinion, with all the other information and allegations it's worth investigating. I'm not gonna be surprised though if you think Benghazi, emailgate, pizzagate and reptilian theories are worth investigating instead, without a hint of irony.

That's one of the main reasons he got elected. Do you not get that???

Yes, like I said he is charismatic and knows how to rile up people. As you've so many times reminded us, he's a reality TV superstar who's always been famous for his demeanor. He's also goofy, aloof and a virtual late night comedy material pandora's box.

"pretty much everyone"??? There you go again with your desperate juvenile arguments. "duh, everything". PFFFFFFFFT

Everyone who's left the white house or the Trump campaign has had nothing but glowing things to say about their time serving the Commander in Chief.

Pruitt, Tillerson, Mnuchin, Priebus, Gary Cohn, McMaster, Bannon. His peers outside his administration Rupert Murdoch, Tom Barrack, those FBI agents. And of course a bit over 50% of Americans and pretty much the whole rest of the planet. I bet you'd struggle to find that many disparaging comments even about Bush jr. Obviously they're not proof nor even bananamountains of evidence, and should not be taken at face value, but immediately dismissing all of these comments with PFFFFFFFFT implies head in sand.

Inflation is not part of this equation. Again, you misunderstand finance and you're trying to get educated by vox. Big mistake. Even the vox article though admits that Trump could only get there the easy way if he didn't pay management fees, didn't pay taxes, and never withdrew a cent. That's OBVIOUSLY not possible. You can't buy buildings, planes, and super model wives that way.

Where did you get your business diploma exactly? FYI I have a business degree also, just appealing to your own authority sadly isn't enough. All of those calculations must and actually do take into account inflation, since it changes the value of currency. If you're done with your hand-waving, now that we've established that according to the very sources you deemed reliable (Bloomberg and Forbes) he would be roughly where he is now just by having invested in the S&P500, let's all wait and see how that changes your world view. Not at all? Didn't think so.

Yes. I can't read the bloomberg article you linked because it's behind a paywall. But the headline says that they reached their assessment based on his 92 page financial disclosures, which include debt.

Bloomberg estimates his net worth in 2015 was $2.9bn. They also estimate his projected worth in 2016 to be pretty much the same, had he just invested all of his money in the early 80's. This is data from the parties you asked for, laying doubt on the absolutely rock solid belief you have he's one of the greatest businessmen ever.

Either 100% or enough that he can service his debts. That's no small accomplishment.

So anything between say 100% and 0%, give or take? What makes you think he's not just renting out his brand, owning a minority share, or being up to his eyeballs in debt? I mean other than blind faith, your business degree and clairvoyance skills?

Does it matter? Do you really doubt he's a billionaire? Isn't that enough?

Why do you doubt Bloomberg? Forbes says its 4 billion. Do you doubt them? How much corroboration do you actually need?

Again trying to strawman this to be about my opinions, which I haven't stated, cute. I don't doubt Bloomberg, but they themselves are pretty open that it's just their estimation without actual proof, a notch better than a wild guess.

I'm not sure how elections work in your shithole country

Brilliant argumentation again.

Everything you say, every position you take, every sentiment you communicate is scrutinized more than the Zapruder film. You really wouldn't equate that to an aptitude test? You think it's all smooth-talk?? ARE YOU HIGH???

Do you know what aptitude tests and exams measure? It isn't the ability to appear convincing in public, or the ability to slander and ridicule your opponents, nor even empty rhetoric to fire up your base. Your campaigns nowadays seem to be more about identity politics and discrediting the opposition than about policy or substance.

YES I DO!!

No you don't.

Success

And he just now decided no more, now I'll dedicate my life for bettering the world, happily taking on all this public scrutiny, media rollercoaster, accusations, fake news etc, just cause he's such a great guy? No skepticism, even a tiny bit?

For fucks sake....go look up hatred and animus.

Yey, another game of Change The Meaning! These are my favorite.

[OngBonga]

Do you think it's possible that Trump made his fortune by illegally trafficking pterodactyls??

I don't think it's impossible

As you were...

[BananaStand]

As you were...

I honestly think he didn't know what pterodactyls are. guessing from context clues I think he assumed it meant some kind of drug.

[CoccoBill]

I honestly think he didn't know what pterodactyls are. guessing from context clues I think he assumed it meant some kind of drug.

How do you suppose we know they existed?



Are those impossible, like legit 0% possibility, to sell?

[OngBonga]

Are those impossible, like legit 0% possibility, to sell?

I can't imagine there's a huge market for black market dinosaur carcasses. And if Trump is somehow making money in such a market, well that would only support the idea that he's a brilliant businessman, especially since he's kept such activites quiet while being the most scrutinised president of modern times.

[OngBonga]

I honestly think he didn't know what pterodactyls are. guessing from context clues I think he assumed it meant some kind of drug.

I actually googled "trump pterodactyl" after posting in case you guys were referring to something mental.

[OngBonga]

26.3% of Americans voted for Trump

And of course a bit over 50% of Americans

Magic.

[BananaStand]

Now, how does this change the fact that Trump supporters have more to lose in their beliefs compared to Trump opposers?

This is not a fact. that's your opinion. And it's based on the erroneous and wishful premise that people like me's heads will explode if we find out some bad news about Trump. As I said, if Trump is proven to be a corrupt, treasonous, charlatan then republicans can just fall back on the Jeb Bushes, Mitt Romneys, and John McCains of the world. Those guys can say "see I told you so", and republicans will be fine.

Look at the left now. Do they seem "fine" to you??

There is no mountain of objective evidence, there's just suggestive information with murky details, and a whole shitload of speculation. Yet, you're absolutely convinced that you're 100% correct and everyone even entertaining any opposing views must be idiots or brainwashed.

That's a gross mischaracterization of my position. "absolutely convinced" is inaccurate. I'm firmly set in my position because of the facts and objective evidence that support it. if you have a different position, you must be using different facts and objective evidence. Would you like to state what those are?? Or, you're using conjecture, speculation, and partisan wishing as the basis for your position? If so, you're a fool.

Which is the reason no one's ever heard of credit defaults.

What's your point here? That defaults happen? Of course they do. Thats why banks do audits. If Trump was in default, we'd know. We would absolutely know. If a bank calls your loan and forces you into bankruptcy...your books become public knowledge. That hasn't happened for Trump....so what does that tell you about whether or not he's in default???

Look at you grasping at straws.

Look at you ignoring objective facts that don't support your argument. How convenient.

I'm not the one rigidly holding a position one way or the other, you can stop making it sound like that's the case already.

No, you're rigidly holding a position of skepticism and denigrating anyone who presumes not to be.

I don't think it's impossible,

OMFG, you do know that pterodactyls are extinct right?

Hyperbole and false premise. Did your business school teach you that auditors look at corporate finances to find out if they're making enough profits to claim their owner is a billionaire, and call the press if they don't?

It's not hyperbole or false at all. I'll bet that Trump does in fact get audited in some capacity over 2000 times per year. That's only 4 audits per company, which is completely reasonable. Lenders, Insurance agencies, and tax preparers all get to look at the books. They're there to ensure that Trump's companies are viable going concerns. If they weren't, they would call the loans, forcing bankruptcy, which would be public knowledge.

So follow me here. Of Trump's 513 companies, 4 of them filed for bankruptcy. >>> We have no public knowledge of bankruptcy regarding the other 509 firms. >>> That means, definitively, that they are NOT bankrupt. >>>> That means that they are solvent.

Isn't logic awesome??!!

I'm sure you don't. What are these non-gaffes I'm ignoring?

Let's start with the fact that he became President

You think they're made up, you have absolutely no way of knowing for sure, no matter how much you claim you have a mountain of objective evidence

I thought you said you could be persuaded by evidence. What happened to that??

. And stop putting words in my mouth, I have never said that. In my personal opinion, with all the other information and allegations it's worth investigating

Saying it's "worth investigating" is the same as saying that the allegations have credibility. You also seem to think an allegation of Trump trafficking pterodactyls is also credible. You sound like a very stable genius.

. I'm not gonna be surprised though if you think Benghazi, emailgate, pizzagate and reptilian theories are worth investigating instead, without a hint of irony.

The first two are worth investigating. Cuz...evidence. In the case of Benghazi, the evidence is four dead bodies. Email-gate is a topic for another thread, but basically you'd be ignorant to say that Hillary didn't commit a crime.

Yes, like I said he is charismatic and knows how to rile up people. As you've so many times reminded us, he's a reality TV superstar who's always been famous for his demeanor. He's also goofy, aloof and a virtual late night comedy material pandora's box.

AND HE STILL WON

Pruitt, Tillerson, Mnuchin, Priebus, Gary Cohn, McMaster, Bannon. His peers outside his administration Rupert Murdoch, Tom Barrack, those FBI agents. And of course a bit over 50% of Americans and pretty much the whole rest of the planet.

Not gonna go through that whole list, but many of those people are, and have been, staunch supporters of Trump. And you sound like a fucking idiot when you say stuff like "the whole rest of the planet".

I bet you'd struggle to find that many disparaging comments even about Bush jr

I actually wouldn't.

Where did you get your business diploma exactly? FYI I have a business degree also, just appealing to your own authority sadly isn't enough. All of those calculations must and actually do take into account inflation, since it changes the value of currency.

No fuck face. If you invested $100 in an index fund at 10%, at the end of the year you'd have $110. Period. It doesn't get adjusted for inflation. I can just see you waving your account statement in some banker's face going "where's my inflation adjustment??!!"

If you're done with your hand-waving, now that we've established that according to the very sources you deemed reliable (Bloomberg and Forbes) he would be roughly where he is now just by having invested in the S&P500, let's all wait and see how that changes your world view. Not at all? Didn't think so.

Wrong....he'd be roughly where he is if you assume A) He paid no fees, B) He never withdrew a cent and C) deferred all of his taxes. The Vox article states this CLEARLY. For him to accumulate even the most conservative estimates of his net worth, and still eat, he'd have to significantly outperform the market. Furthermore, we know he DIDN'T invest in the S&P 500. He invested in real estate, where sometimes the returns are higher, but sometimes they are very much not higher. In fact, real estate over the last century has only averaged 1% per year. A TENTH of the S&P 500.

So if he's worth that much....he got there the hard way. What does that tell you about his skills??

Bloomberg estimates his net worth in 2015 was $2.9bn.

I think it's funny that you acknowledge the figure as his "net" worth, while simultaneously asking "I wonder if that could be offset by debt?". Hilarious. Were you absent the day they taught the definition of the word "net" in business school?

What makes you think he's not ..... up to his eyeballs in debt?

I looked up the word "net" in the dictionary.

Do you know what aptitude tests and exams measure? It isn't the ability to appear convincing in public, or the ability to slander and ridicule your opponents, nor even empty rhetoric to fire up your base.

This sounds like the whiny bitching of someone who's disappointed with the election results. You're either being intentionally stubborn, or your hopelessly ignorant about what it actually takes to win a national election for the office of President. Either way, I'm done discussing this point with you.

Your campaigns Democrats nowadays seem to be more about identity politics and discrediting the opposition than about policy or substance, and that's why they lost

Fixed your post, corrections in bold.

And he just now decided no more, now I'll dedicate my life for bettering the world, happily taking on all this public scrutiny, media rollercoaster, accusations, fake news etc, just cause he's such a great guy? No skepticism, even a tiny bit?

Not 'just cause he's a great guy'. Personal ambition and patriotism. I'm sure I've said that multiple times, but you've yet again moved the goalpost just to be a cunt.

[CoccoBill]

This is not a fact. that's your opinion. And it's based on the erroneous and wishful premise that people like me's heads will explode if we find out some bad news about Trump. As I said, if Trump is proven to be a corrupt, treasonous, charlatan then republicans can just fall back on the Jeb Bushes, Mitt Romneys, and John McCains of the world. Those guys can say "see I told you so", and republicans will be fine.

If Trump voters are proven wrong, have they been duped and done themselves and their country a huge disservice? Does this apply to those who didn't vote for him? Are you deliberately trolling and refusing to connect the dots?

What's your point here? That defaults happen? Of course they do. Thats why banks do audits. If Trump was in default, we'd know. We would absolutely know. If a bank calls your loan and forces you into bankruptcy...your books become public knowledge. That hasn't happened for Trump....so what does that tell you about whether or not he's in default???

I keep forgetting everything needs to be spelled out for you. Defaults happen despite banks monitoring and doing audits. Therefore audits of Trump's companies do not guarantee that they'll never run into financial trouble, or that they haven't or that they're making yuuge profits, Mr Business Degree.

No, you're rigidly holding a position of skepticism and denigrating anyone who presumes not to be.

cynicism
Without solid verifiable facts skepticism is the only reasonable position.

So follow me here. Of Trump's 513 companies, 4 of them filed for bankruptcy. >>> We have no public knowledge of bankruptcy regarding the other 509 firms. >>> That means, definitively, that they are NOT bankrupt. >>>> That means that they are solvent.

Isn't logic awesome??!!

It is. Too bad it doesn't allow for a leap from solvent >>> yuugely profitable.

Let's start with the fact that he became President

Right, so now I'm not aware that he was elected? That because he got elected, he must be smart, competent, successful, not corrupt, not prejudiced, smell good and one of the greatest cellists of all time?

I thought you said you could be persuaded by evidence. What happened to that??

Maybe I've seen as much evidence from you as you've probably seen from me, since there isn't any. Yet only one of us is convinced, which was the whole point of this whole conversation. Now call me names bad boy.


Saying it's "worth investigating" is the same as saying that the allegations have credibility. You also seem to think an allegation of Trump trafficking pterodactyls is also credible. You sound like a very stable genius.

AND HE STILL WON

Despite, or exactly because of?

No fuck face. If you invested $100 in an index fund at 10%, at the end of the year you'd have $110. Period. It doesn't get adjusted for inflation. I can just see you waving your account statement in some banker's face going "where's my inflation adjustment??!!"

Rawwr. You're really fucking bad in this considering you supposedly have a degree. Yes you'll have $110, but it won't be worth $110 in last year's currency value. It'll likely be a per cent or two less. We could leave out the inflation if we were just calculating dollars on his bank account, but we're not doing that. We're comparing the relative appreciation of his real estate and other businesses to stock market index valuations. $100 of 1980 dollars had the same purchasing power as £318.60 2018 dollars.

Wrong....he'd be roughly where he is if you assume A) He paid no fees, B) He never withdrew a cent and C) deferred all of his taxes. The Vox article states this CLEARLY. For him to accumulate even the most conservative estimates of his net worth, he'd have to significantly outperform the market. Furthermore, we know he DIDN'T invest in the S&P 500. He invested in real estate, where sometimes the returns are higher, but sometimes they are very much not higher. In fact, real estate over the last century has only averaged 1% per year. A TENTH of the S&P 500.

Let me explain. This whole thing is to show a person starting with millions can earn billions, just by investing in the index. Any fucking idiot is able to do that. You're now suggesting, that he must be a brilliant businessman since he's beating that? As per the article: "That's not really impressive. Worse, it suggests that his success is almost entirely the result of having inherited money from his father. His own actions might have even cost him money." Now, that may or may not be true, but you gotta have your head really deep up your ass to unequivocally think he must be a business mastermind.

I think it's funny that you acknowledge the figure as his "net" worth, while simultaneously asking "I wonder if that could be offset by debt?". Hilarious. Were you absent the day they taught the definition of the word "net" in business school?

I don't "accept" it as irrefutable fact, I accept it as Bloomberg's estimate. We don't know the truth.

I looked up the word "net" in the dictionary.

Did it say it means Trump's hands are massive?

This sounds like the whiny bitching of someone who's disappointed with the election results. You're either being intentionally stubborn, or your hopelessly ignorant about what it actually takes to win a national election for the office of President. Either way, I'm done discussing this point with you.

I think most of all it takes lots of campaign donations.

Fixed your post, corrections in bold.

Right, because no one ever voted a republican because they happen to be male, or white, or evangelical christian, or libertarian, or...

Not 'just cause he's a great guy'. Personal ambition and patriotism. I'm sure I've said that multiple times, but you've yet again moved the goalpost just to be a cunt.

So he wouldn't endure the cost, stress, and public scrutiny that comes with being President for financial success, but he's definitely doing it for personal ambition and patriotism.

[Poopadoop]

So he wouldn't endure the cost, stress, and public scrutiny that comes with being President for financial success, but he's definitely doing it for personal ambition and patriotism.

Yeah he's so patriotic and focused on helping his country that he hired the kids and son-in-law of a very stable genius to work in his administration.

[BananaStand]

If Trump voters are proven wrong, have they been duped and done themselves and their country a huge disservice?

Duped? Not really. The Russia stuff was out well before election day. He didn't show his tax returns. He didn't take an IQ test. He could have. But he didn't. People knew he didn't, and they voted for him anyway. So I don't see how anyone can claim they were fooled if it turns out he's a broke, stupid, russian spy.

Does this apply to those who didn't vote for him? Are you deliberately trolling and refusing to connect the dots?

It is you who is ignoring dots sir. You wanna talk about 'duped'. Let's talk about Democrats. They were all hornswaggled into believing that the primary was honest. As it turns out, Bernie never had a chance. How did they react to being 'duped'?

They got angry at Trump for letting the Russians red-pill them.

Defaults happen despite banks monitoring and doing audits.

Wrong. Defaults happen BECAUSE of banks monitoring and doing audits. They come in and peek at the books some 2000 times a year. And if they every crunch the numbers and don't like the result, it's game over. "Hey Captain Combover...your debt-to-equity ratio sucks. Welcome to default". That's how it happens. They don't just wait until you stop paying your bills.

Therefore audits of Trump's companies do not guarantee that they'll never run into financial trouble,

Do you know what "going concern" means. Without googling it?

or that they haven't

Actually, that is what it means.

Without solid verifiable facts skepticism is the only reasonable position.

There are solid verifiable facts. You just don't like them.

It is. Too bad it doesn't allow for a leap from solvent >>> yuugely profitable.

Logic painted you into a corner and now you move the goalpost. Cute.

That because he got elected, he must be smart, competent, successful, not corrupt, not prejudiced, smell good and one of the greatest cellists of all time?

Winning an election means most of those things, yes. I'm also guessing Trump is more into woodwinds. Maybe jazz clarinet.

Maybe I've seen as much evidence from you as you've probably seen from me, since there isn't any.

Yes there is

Despite, or exactly because of?

Because of.

We could leave out the inflation if we were just calculating dollars on his bank account, but we're not doing that.

Actually, yes. That's exactly what we're doing.

This whole thing is to show a person starting with millions can earn billions, just by investing in the index. Any fucking idiot is able to do that.

Any fucking idiot who lives in a fantasy universe where he doesn't pay taxes, management fees, or need money to live.

You're now suggesting, that he must be a brilliant businessman since he's beating that?

I'm suggesting that above average performance is strong evidence of exceptional skill

I think most of all it takes lots of campaign donations.

Then Clinton should have won 538-0

Right, because no one ever voted a republican because they happen to be male, or white, or evangelical christian, or libertarian, or...

Look dude, if you think problems of identity politics and lack of messaging are equal on both sides...you're fucking bonkers.

So he wouldn't endure the cost, stress, and public scrutiny that comes with being President for financial success, but he's definitely doing it for personal ambition and patriotism.

It seems highly unlikely that he could make more money by being president than he can business-ing for the rest of his life. It doesn't make mathematical sense that he could tread-water on business growth for what is surely at least half of his remaining life, and somehow end up with more money. Selling a few extra rooms at Mar-a-lago, or passing tax cuts that are SURE to be gone if a Democrat ever gets back in office....just doesn't seem like enough incentive.

What does make sense is that he's an exceptionally driven person who probably believes that he has the right policy ideas to drive a prosperous economy. I suspect that's the same reason that Obama, or Reagan, or Chester A Arthur became president.

[CoccoBill]

Logic painted you into a corner and now you move the goalpost. Cute.

Oh so your argument was all along that Trump must be a great businessman because his companies are solvent? You have very interesting definitions about stuff.

Because of.

That was unexpected, we agree then. He probably won mainly because he is famous, charismatic and was able to rile up his base.

Actually, yes. That's exactly what we're doing.

No, we're talking about his properties and investments. Or at least I, Bloomberg and Forbes are.

I'm suggesting that above average performance is strong evidence of exceptional skill

If half the businesses in America are run by exceptional people, how are the exceptional? No wait sorry, I better clarify since this might be difficult to comprehend. 50% are doing better than average, 50% worse than average.

Then Clinton should have won 538-0

https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/c...e?id=N00023864
https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/c...e?id=N00000019

$408M vs $794M, so not really.

[MadMojoMonkey]

You should be applauded for knowing how to toe the line while staying on the unrepproachable side of it.

No fuck face.

This is pushing it.

[Poopadoop]

G'dam. This guy is so free from any form of corruption I can't believe I ever doubted him!

[BananaStand]

You should be applauded for knowing how to toe the line while staying on the unrepproachable side of it.




This is pushing it.

I'm so glad you're here.