How is someone who inherits money and goes bankrupt more impressive than being a surgeon?

How do you explain his financial success ??? :confused:

He learned to use his brand as a profit tool and divested from risky property. Overall, Trump turned 300 million he inherited from his father into 4 billion in assets.
 
Last edited:

Michael-in-Fun-Run-michael-scott-1534318-1212-682-620x240.jpg
 
He learned to use his brand as a profit tool and divested from risky property. Overall, Trump turned 300 million he inherited from his father into 4 billion in assets.

Putting 100 million into an index fund for 30yrs @ 8% will yield over 1 billion, pretty sure if anyone put 300 million in such a fund they would have way more than 4 billion.
 
He inherited his father's company 40 years ago. Despite his claims, his worth is rated at 4B. Which comes to 12.74% per year. Not impressive, especially given the governmental assistance.
 
He learned to use his brand as a profit tool and divested from risky property. Overall, Trump turned 300 million he inherited from his father into 4 billion in assets.

4 billion in assets and 3 billion in liabilities lol
 
Putting 100 million into an index fund for 30yrs @ 8% will yield over 1 billion, pretty sure if anyone put 300 million in such a fund they would have way more than 4 billion.

No, 300 million at the same CAGR will yield exactly 3 times 100 million. 3.019 billion.

Look, you don't have to like Trump at all to realize he's intelligent. As Hoppe says: "The rich are characteristically bright and industrious, and the poor typically dull, lazy, or both." I do not think that I probably agree with Donald Trump on many political issues. I do not think my political philosophy has anything to do with his, if he even has one. But rich people are generally smart.

Enough rich-bashing. Enough envy. The rich are rich for a reason: they got stuff done. And, at least in America, the stuff they got done was generally not evil, it was almost always productive and beneficial. I guess I'm not really talking to you guys on RPF here, I don't think there's much of that attitude here. But out there in the world, it's everywhere. The assumption is, "Oh, anybody's who's rich is only where they are because they were lucky. And also they're oppressors and greedy and wicked." Basically, if you're rich, you're assumed to be bad, and you're hated. It's stupid and it's annoying.

Trump-bashing, on the other hand: have at! He's ripped off a whole lot of his creditors over the years, is my understanding. That's certainly less than admirable. Focus on the bankrupcy (ies?), not the inheritance. Nothing wrong with inheritance. Inheritance is part of the strength of the institution of the family. Stronger families and weaker states are exactly what we need!
 
No, 300 million at the same CAGR will yield exactly 3 times 100 million. 3.019 billion.

:confused:


Look, you don't have to like Trump at all to realize he's intelligent. As Hoppe says: "The rich are characteristically bright and industrious, and the poor typically dull, lazy, or both." I do not think that I probably agree with Donald Trump on many political issues. I do not think my political philosophy has anything to do with his, if he even has one. But rich people are generally smart.

Enough rich-bashing. Enough envy. The rich are rich for a reason: they got stuff done. And, at least in America, the stuff they got done was generally not evil, it was almost always productive and beneficial. I guess I'm not really talking to you guys on RPF here, I don't think there's much of that attitude here. But out there in the world, it's everywhere. The assumption is, "Oh, anybody's who's rich is only where they are because they were lucky. And also they're oppressors and greedy and wicked." Basically, if you're rich, you're assumed to be bad, and you're hated. It's stupid and it's annoying.

Trump-bashing, on the other hand: have at! He's ripped off a whole lot of his creditors over the years, is my understanding. That's certainly less than admirable. Focus on the bankrupcy (ies?), not the inheritance. Nothing wrong with inheritance. Inheritance is part of the strength of the institution of the family. Stronger families and weaker states are exactly what we need!

58688360.jpg
 
Focus on the bankrupcy (ies?), not the inheritance. Nothing wrong with inheritance. Inheritance is part of the strength of the institution of the family. Stronger families and weaker states are exactly what we need!

I don't think anyone here is bashing him for his inheritance. Simply stating that, given his inheritance, his gains are not impressive.
 
He'll unravel soon. The 24/7 news coverage isn't sustainable. Even now he has some of the lowest favorability ratings.

He's good at handling amateur media "gotcha" questions and pretending that he can't be bought. But he gives horrible answers when pressed slightly on policy questions. For example, when asked about his support for single-payer, he says we need to take care of those who can't afford it. How will it be funded? By working out very VERY smart deals with hospitals.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

That's not much different from many of Romney's "I'll show leadership" answers.
 
He's running for President not Miss USA.

People love Trump admitting his flaws and how is 1/100th as evil as the beltway.



http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...s-might-be-the-only-way-to-stop-don/?page=all

Similarly, most of Mr. Trump’s support is people of various factions and persuasions rightfully fed up with being fed up. They don’t care that Mr. Trump is no movement conservative, because they’ve watched most of the Republicans they’ve elected ignore or violate the party platform once in office anyway. Mr. Trump is not their noble champion, but their instrument to strike back against a political party that has betrayed them time and time again.
 
Last edited:
Becuz Murica, illegals, muh jerbs, and Murica

Ah, so someone who draws a correlation between a high unemployment rate and 30 million illegals is somehow an idiot?

Are the Japanese idiots for wanting to employ Japanese before foreigners? Are the South Koreans idiots for only wanting to minimize the number of unemployed citizens before they employ foreigners?

Attacking unemployed citizens instead of the illegals who clearly violated our nation's laws shows how far gone some of the individuals on these forums are. It clearly makes sense to me now that the vast majority of 20-something Rand supporters don't understand that removing the illegals and H1-B visa holders will free up jobs for US citizens, which will in turn lower the crime rate and increase the per capita GDP.

Ultimately this is a political election for the US, but reading your comment you would think you're from Mexico or Central America. I'm sure you have more sympathy for the illegals than the unemployed US citizens that are simply finding an outlet for their frustration through Trump.

Rand's campaign is not going to perform well if he thinks he will get elected by catering to 20-somethings like you, who have very little understanding of how a large number of illegal immigrants = high crime, high unemployment, and lower wages. There is a reason why Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and other countries with almost zero illegals are safe, prosperous, and have some of the highest quality of life anywhere in the world.

I'm just blown away that people like you would spit in the face of citizens who want jobs to go to US citizens before foreigners. If I wouldn't know any better, I would think you were a George Soros lackey.
 
Similarly, most of Mr. Trump’s support is people of various factions and persuasions rightfully fed up with being fed up. They don’t care that Mr. Trump is no movement conservative, because they’ve watched most of the Republicans they’ve elected ignore or violate the party platform once in office anyway.
Yeah, they're quick to dismiss any Republican who strays an inch from their purity test, but they overlook dozens of Trump's sins. Saying "I'm very pro-choice" alone would've finished any other candidate.

Mr. Trump is not their noble champion, but their instrument to strike back against a political party that has betrayed them time and time again.
And then what happens when Trump gets into office and screws them over (which he will)? They're right back where they were, with nothing accomplished. They'd be better off sticking behind Cruz and at least being principled...as principled as they expect everyone else to be. :rolleyes:
 
Back
Top