3 ms·

> See the other comment about how he'd have much more money if he'd plowed his inheritance into an index fund See my other comment about how that's not actuall

by imron 10y ago

> See the other comment about how he'd have much more money if he'd plowed his inheritance into an index fund See my other comment about how that's not actually true, but in any case we are not talking about how much money he could have made, or whether he is the most intelligent out of all businessmen, but whether or not he is intelligent. I would argue it takes more intelligence to run a multi-billion dollar empire than it takes to invest in an index fund, even if the index makes larger returns in the long run. Not everyone is motivated by money, especially if your net worth is several hundred million dollars, which it was for Trump at the point when Fortune started the calculation that he would have been better off investing in an index fund. > He's a bad businessman who keeps going bankrupt 6 times out of 100+ businesses? That's not a bad strike rate. > This last time, it seems he went into debt to the Russians. Maybe Putin is not so foolish. > Honestly, I think he didn't release his tax returns because they'd show he's actually broke and living off borrowed cash. And there was me thinking it was the Right that was in to conspiracy theories.

xapata 10y ago
> conspiracy No conspiracy, just one guy. He's said in court deposition (for a lawsuit he lost) that he claims his net worth is however he's feeling that day. > 6 out of 100+ Not all the businesses are equivalent, nor are most of them really his, beyond selling a license to his name. The Trump Organization is less than 200 people, closer to 100. It's mostly real estate deals, not even building management. Not really what comes to mind for the phrase "empire". He certainly wants that, though.
- imron 10y ago
  > Not all the businesses are equivalent No, they're not, but the fact still stands that bankruptcies make up only a small portion of his total businesses, even when taking away ones he's only licensed his name to. > The Trump Organization is less than 200 people, closer to 100. CNN (notoriously anti-Trump) calculates Trump has created around 34,000 jobs. http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/03/news/economy/donald-trump-jobs-created/ http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/03/news/economy/donald-trump-jo... Not sure where the 100-200 people statistic comes from, but it seems a little on the low side. There are plenty of things to criticize Trump about, but making things up to make him look bad reflects badly on the person making things up, not on Trump.
  - xapata 10y ago
    "Responsible for" is different than employed by. The article you linked says he employs 22k people, not 34k. Either way, that's much larger than 200. I did a brief search for "Trump Organization employees" and can't find the article I read last week. So, my apologies, I'll just have to say that I read it in a reputable newspaper. Still, I find it plausible that Trump Organization directly employs a handful of people and the rest of the 22k are employees of subsidiaries.

by imron 10y ago

xapata 10y ago

> conspiracy No conspiracy, just one guy. He's said in court deposition (for a lawsuit he lost) that he claims his net worth is however he's feeling that day. > 6 out of 100+ Not all the businesses are equivalent, nor are most of them really his, beyond selling a license to his name. The Trump Organization is less than 200 people, closer to 100. It's mostly real estate deals, not even building management. Not really what comes to mind for the phrase "empire". He certainly wants that, though.

imron 10y ago
> Not all the businesses are equivalent No, they're not, but the fact still stands that bankruptcies make up only a small portion of his total businesses, even when taking away ones he's only licensed his name to. > The Trump Organization is less than 200 people, closer to 100. CNN (notoriously anti-Trump) calculates Trump has created around 34,000 jobs. http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/03/news/economy/donald-trump-jobs-created/ http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/03/news/economy/donald-trump-jo... Not sure where the 100-200 people statistic comes from, but it seems a little on the low side. There are plenty of things to criticize Trump about, but making things up to make him look bad reflects badly on the person making things up, not on Trump.
- xapata 10y ago
  "Responsible for" is different than employed by. The article you linked says he employs 22k people, not 34k. Either way, that's much larger than 200. I did a brief search for "Trump Organization employees" and can't find the article I read last week. So, my apologies, I'll just have to say that I read it in a reputable newspaper. Still, I find it plausible that Trump Organization directly employs a handful of people and the rest of the 22k are employees of subsidiaries.