Donald Trump
" Hillary has a rape problem as well...          Contrast that with Hillary's New (second one) "Mirrors" message about Trump: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61CiO7hVyF4 "The only legitimate use of a computer is to play games." - Eugene Jarvis PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910 Last edited by DalaiLama#6738 on Oct 2, 2016, 12:43:52 AM
|
|
" Does he? He saved 20 years worth of taxes and made billions of dollars while doing it. I wonder if Hillary will bring this up in the debate, there are several ways for Trump to spin this in his own favor. Maybe John Miller leaked the document? 5D chess? :^) GGG banning all political discussion shortly after getting acquired by China is a weird coincidence.
|
|
" Trump is more like a mix bag of business failures and real success. |
|
|
I don't even understand how so many people actually support Trump.
|
|
 Poe Pvp experience
https://youtu.be/Z6eg3aB_V1g?t=302 |
|
" #rekt GGG banning all political discussion shortly after getting acquired by China is a weird coincidence.
|
|
|
You can't actually deflect criticism about Trump using the Clintons forever. The guy mismanaged his bussinesses (his casino was a black hole and made other people lose their money) and then abused a broken system, then he goes blasting other people for that and talks about fixing it (while his tax plan is a give away to himself mostly). He is the 1%er that pretends to fight for the people, a demagogue. He is actually melting away, it will be fun to see him react this week.
He brags about being a great bussinessman when he is average at best, and a disaster at worst. He is a phony, and you are failing for his nigerian prince scam. He is not smart doing this, he is just scum. Ethics is more important than legality, any other way to see this is morally bankrupt. Anyway, I have the feeling there is more to it about that Clinton thing (because there is always more to it, Hanlon's razor?). I'm pretty sick of sophistry. Add a Forsaken Masters questline https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2297942 Last edited by NeroNoah#1010 on Oct 2, 2016, 5:23:53 PM
|
|
|
Woman forced to change her airline seat because two muslim men were seated next to her. MSM doesn't give a shit, would rather talk about how Trump called a woman fat 20 years ago :3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDZez2WMtG4 GGG banning all political discussion shortly after getting acquired by China is a weird coincidence.
|
|
" Deflection. Both things are awful, and Trump never stopped doing that stuff anyway. It shows who he is. You don't have any high ground when it comes to woman rights supporting him. Muh, he is going to protect us from terrorists (ha ha ha, nope). He supports regressive policies and is allied with regressive people. Add a Forsaken Masters questline https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2297942 Last edited by NeroNoah#1010 on Oct 2, 2016, 7:42:51 PM
|
|
" For some it's not a matter of deflecting Trump criticism. It is just Hillary is far worse. Her comments on Bernie supporters - there was no reason for that whatsoever. Most of those people were/are in her camp willing to support her, despite learning how the DNC treated their candidate unfairly. Hillary is a woman who cares only about herself and being president. If she thought launching nukes on Moscow would guarantee her election, she'd be trying to get launch codes and make it happen. She is ruthless and has no vision. She is greedy, corrupt and so dishonest that "Hillary's Number of lies is the political equivalent of Graham's number. She thinks nothing of starting wars, and even less of the victims. " I don't know if you read the article and followed the article's links or just posted the article. If you had followed the links you should have seen: "spurred doubts among some gaming analysts - and casino rivals - that Mr. Trump can transform the former white elephant into a cash cow " IOW- The Taj was already a major problem -putting its former owners out of business at a loss of several hundred million dollars. "To succeed, the Taj needs record-breaking revenues" IOW- Trump doesn't have to just be a good business man, but the best ever to have the Taj succeed. Someone who has run a company and opened new stores and "cannibalized" existing stores understands just how difficult that is. A good chunk of the money you make from your new facility is losses taken from the old facility. It is never a great deal. Why do it? Because, if a competitor takes that location, your existing facilities can still take those losses, and you won't get any of the revenue from the potential new location. Its a matter of having deep enough pockets to survive the bleeding. At the time, the $1.1 Billion in construction costs was a record. Now, it doesn't even make the top ten. Consider that a water fountain alone at one casino cost over 100 million dollars. " Abused? " Mr. Trump is feeling so sure of things that he was even willing to commit himself to backing the Taj bonds with his own assets, something he is not legally required to do. " Businesses are not usually set up with personal liability. Let me make this very clear, with an example - if the company you currently work for goes out of business, will the creditors come and take away your personal bank account, or possessions? Why not? Because the liabilities aren't set up that way. You can argue whether you think it is good or bad, but it is an intentional systemic design in order to encourage people to start businesses up. It is also why bankruptcy laws exist, and why more than one type of bankruptcy exists. " How many more hours a week would you need to earn an extra 10 Million dollars (US)? If you had a billion dollars of liquid assets, each 1% of non compounded interest would earn you that much. So if you can potentially earn 4% by letting the money sit in a bank - you would make 40 million. And the taxes on the interest are 25% (10 million) - so you make 30 million. Now, you can also take a little bit of risk, (investing in a good company to help them expand) - the return rate is 4% - so you make 40 million (and in the process create 1,200 jobs), but the taxes are 35% (14 million)- so you would be getting 26 million back. You are risking your money - and getting less in return (if you succeed) 26 million vs 30 million. Now, the government lowers the investment tax to 20% (8 million on the 40 million profit). You net 32 million with some risk. You have also created 1200 decent jobs (let's say at 65,000 average wage). We will simplify and say each worker is paying taxes on 40 thousand after deductions - which at current US rates would net roughly $5,800 per worker. Again rough numbers - 7 million dollars in additional income tax. So, by not lowering the tax rate - the government will get 10 million in taxes . By lowering the tax rate - the government will get 15 million in taxes (8+15) The government also facilitates the creation of 1,200 new jobs. The spending from each of those new jobs will help create additional jobs, which will net the government even more taxes and so on. How is that "giving" anything away? Here is Trump's take on what happened: "These politicians--many of whom had never functioned in the world of big business, or any business, for that matter--couldn't see past their fingertips." - excerpted from below the spoiler:
Spoiler
" It was 1986, the peak of the real estate market's boom. Some pundits down in Washington, D.C., decided it was time to rein in a few overzealous developers, who, the pols claimed, were unfairly taking advantage of tax breaks and favorable depreciation schedules. The 1981 tax code was revised, and the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1986 (TEFRA) was passed, destroying just about any incentive anyone might have for investing in real estate. And, you may remember, it included a stipulation that the tax laws be applied retroactively. Overnight developers and investors went bust by the thousands. The banks did just as badly. Here's why. First, TEFRA eviscerated the tax shelters--in place to encourage investment--thereby leaving investors virtually no incentive to put their money into any type of development--including low- and moderate-income housing. Second, the upper-income tax rate was lowered from 51 percent to 32 percent. Investing involves risk. With a 51 percent tax, investors might take a chance on a new housing project. If the project went south, the investor could recapture his losses in the form of a tax break. If an investor is taxed only 32 percent, why bother with the risk? The most damaging effect of this law was, of course, that it would be applied retroactively. Property values fell so precipitously that developers who had never missed a loan payment were being foreclosed upon because regulators, pointing to the abruptly devalued worth of their mortgaged property, demanded millions more in additional collateral. I couldn't believe that a government would allow deals to be made and then wipe them out. It's one thing to establish a new set of guidelines; it's another thing to say, Guess what, the rules you were playing by, and basing already done deals on, are dead. Some people had to pay for tax shelters while, at the same time, paying taxes on the shelters they were buying. Most surprisingly, while I can understand politicians doing the wrong thing, I couldn't believe that the retroactivity provisions would be upheld by the courts, but amazingly, they were. It was a total disaster and incredibly unfair. People don't seem to understand this (and apparently members of the Supreme Court don't either), but in terms of economics, real estate is the backbone of this country. The industry alone accounts for 20 percent of the gross national product, employs eight million workers, and generates $200 billion in tax revenues. Construction not only creates jobs, it spurs manufacturing. And consider the retail aspect: If people buy houses, they buy carpets, furniture, and so on. These politicians--many of whom had never functioned in the world of big business, or any business, for that matter--couldn't see past their fingertips. They passed this thing into law without giving one thought to the long-term consequences. Witness the domino effect: By 1993, 62 percent of all airlines had gone bankrupt. Fewer houses were under construction than in 1946. Not since the Great Depression were so few construction workers employed. The Resolution Trust Corporation was forced to sell its property at five cents on the dollar. Real estate values sunk trillions of dollars during this time. Imagine my despair as I watched every single asset I owned--condominiums, hotels, casinos, my airline--hit the skids. " " Let's go back to the Billion dollars you have to invest. You invest in real estate with a potential to make a lot of money, but with a high risk. Although your end product (a commercial building) doesn't create a lot of jobs, it does increase property taxes, and the construction temporarily generates quite a few good jobs and spin off jobs. (Which is in Trump's commentary). The net result is a stronger economy, and if the commercial building is successfully leased out - a gain in total tax revenue. The risk of losing money in commercial development is VERY real. It happens a LOT. So, developers need a financial incentive. In this case, banks were renegotiating loans at a lower rate - which took some of the sting out of development losses. That renegotiating didn't cost the government a penny. But, the government wanted a cut of the money saved. (Imagine that if you went to the grocery store and used coupons, and the government wanted to get 30% of whatever you saved on coupons) The government took less of a cut, in order to try and continue "growing" the real estate business. It was a good cause - so that aspect of the law Bill Clinton signed was good. It helped the economy. That willingness to compromise was a big part of how Bill Clinton was able to have some successes despite facing opposition in Congress. That willingness to compromise has been far more evident in Trump than in Clinton. We've seen Trump's business failures. We know that he knows how to turn lemons into lemonade. We don't know that Hillary has the business acumen to even run a lemonade stand. HROD17, Oct 27 2015: "Don’t let anybody tell you that it’s corporations and businesses that create jobs' brought critics out of the woodwork on Twitter."  Here's the video of her inane comment: http://video.dailymail.co.uk/video/1418450360/2014/10/1418450360_3862400677001_Hillary.mp4 I've flushed things that have more business savvy than Hillary Clinton. "The only legitimate use of a computer is to play games." - Eugene Jarvis
PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910 |
|
