3 ms·

He's not gonna be happy they can operate financially without his assent

bilbo0s 2y ago
He still controls the congress, the white house and the supreme court. So he could potentially pull a completely illegal fast one and freeze their accounts. Since rule of law seems on fairly shaky ground right now in any case.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > he could potentially pull a completely illegal fast one and freeze their accounts Harvard (and most institutions and powerful individuals) would be smart to maintain liquid assets and a bank account outside America’s control.
  - outer_web 2y ago
    Maybe their endowment is held in treasurys they should start selling off...
    - bilbo0s 2y ago
      LOL I like the way you think!
  - bilbo0s 2y ago
    This is true, and they have likely been accelerating the arrangements they already had for a while now. At the same time however, getting 50 billion in assets into various European jurisdictions is not at all easy. I'd estimate Trump could cut off 70-90 percent of what Harvard has to work with. Alumni will need to come through for continuing operations if the worst does happen. And I'm certain Harvard has put some thought into that contingency as well.
  - bgarbiak 2y ago
    Trump can make that illegal in no time. „No foreign funds” is a well known method of fighting opposition, tried and tested in many soft regimes (looking for a recent example, Hungary comes to mind).
  - chairmansteve 2y ago
    Bitcoin!
  - colechristensen 2y ago
    >a bank account outside America’s control There really isn't such a thing if you want to do business in America. If you're in the US and doing business with a bank, the courts can order that bank to do things or face isolation from the entire financial system.
    - Boldened15 2y ago
      Yeah I'm no expert in financial systems but since the money ultimately needs to be spent in the U.S. it doesn't seem that important whether the funds are frozen in the U.S. or locked away overseas and can't be transferred in for the next ~4 years.
      - colechristensen 2y ago
        It's much more than that, foreign banks will comply with US court orders, it's not just a blockade. US courts shut down a series of Swiss banks that were trying to hide American's assets behind the swiss banking secrecy laws while also doing business on American soil (just having bank employees in the country did it).
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > since the money ultimately needs to be spent in the U.S. it doesn't seem that important whether the funds are frozen in the U.S. Of course it does. The hypothetical we're considering is the administration illegally freezing bank accounts. You don't need something legally impenetrable. Just complicated enough that it slows down the goons while you fight them in court.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > There really isn't such a thing if you want to do business in America There are to varying extents. You want a country that isn't aligned with or dependent on America, but also isn't its adversary. (And which has a good banking system.) That list was classically Turkey, the UAE and Switzerland. Today I'd add India, Qatar, Canada and Brazil and remove Switzerland.
- alabastervlog 2y ago
  He may issue an EO against them similar to the ones he's successfully used to bring major law firms he doesn't like to heel: ban consideration of former Harvard employees (... maybe also graduates?) for Federal jobs, revoke clearances held by anyone employed by Harvard, and ban them from Federal property. Maybe with some other creative terms thrown in to mess with universities in particular.
  - SoftTalker 2y ago
    That is always a risk of working for the government. Your job exists more or less at the whims of the currently governing administration.
    - unclebucknasty 2y ago
      >Your job exists more or less at the whims of the currently governing administration. Perhaps in theory, but not in practice as a historical norm. And, certainly not for "standard" non-appointed, bureaucratic roles. It's important that we don't normalize what we're seeing here, in terms of quality or degree.
    - ajross 2y ago
      That has essentially never been a risk for a non-appointed government employee in the United States of America, at least for the past century or so. We Don't Politicize the Bureaucracy. And that was at least in part the secret sauce to our generational success, that we could immunize the workings of the government from the pique and emotion of its leadership. Or we didn't. Now we do. Kinda sucks.
      - miley_cyrus 2y ago
        [flagged]
        const_cast 2y ago
        > You want to argue that Joe Biden didn't weaponize every branch of the bureaucracy against Republicans? He didn't. I don't know why you guys think he did. A lot of those agencies, like the Justice Department, act independently. It's not like any Republicans were jailed. This is starting to seem less like a legitimate take, and more like a strange fetish for persecution. For the record, if people like President Trump want to no longer be under the eye of Justice, they should stop doing illegal things. It seems every other American citizen has figured that out. It is shameful our own president has not.
- qingcharles 2y ago
  I mean, it turns out the fed has the power to pull any money from any account they wish, at any time, like they recently did with NYC.

He still controls the congress, the white house and the supreme court. So he could potentially pull a completely illegal fast one and freeze their accounts. Since rule of law seems on fairly shaky ground right now in any case.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> he could potentially pull a completely illegal fast one and freeze their accounts Harvard (and most institutions and powerful individuals) would be smart to maintain liquid assets and a bank account outside America’s control.
- outer_web 2y ago
  Maybe their endowment is held in treasurys they should start selling off...
  - bilbo0s 2y ago
    LOL I like the way you think!
- bilbo0s 2y ago
  This is true, and they have likely been accelerating the arrangements they already had for a while now. At the same time however, getting 50 billion in assets into various European jurisdictions is not at all easy. I'd estimate Trump could cut off 70-90 percent of what Harvard has to work with. Alumni will need to come through for continuing operations if the worst does happen. And I'm certain Harvard has put some thought into that contingency as well.
- bgarbiak 2y ago
  Trump can make that illegal in no time. „No foreign funds” is a well known method of fighting opposition, tried and tested in many soft regimes (looking for a recent example, Hungary comes to mind).
- chairmansteve 2y ago
  Bitcoin!
- colechristensen 2y ago
  >a bank account outside America’s control There really isn't such a thing if you want to do business in America. If you're in the US and doing business with a bank, the courts can order that bank to do things or face isolation from the entire financial system.
  - Boldened15 2y ago
    Yeah I'm no expert in financial systems but since the money ultimately needs to be spent in the U.S. it doesn't seem that important whether the funds are frozen in the U.S. or locked away overseas and can't be transferred in for the next ~4 years.
    - colechristensen 2y ago
      It's much more than that, foreign banks will comply with US court orders, it's not just a blockade. US courts shut down a series of Swiss banks that were trying to hide American's assets behind the swiss banking secrecy laws while also doing business on American soil (just having bank employees in the country did it).
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > since the money ultimately needs to be spent in the U.S. it doesn't seem that important whether the funds are frozen in the U.S. Of course it does. The hypothetical we're considering is the administration illegally freezing bank accounts. You don't need something legally impenetrable. Just complicated enough that it slows down the goons while you fight them in court.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > There really isn't such a thing if you want to do business in America There are to varying extents. You want a country that isn't aligned with or dependent on America, but also isn't its adversary. (And which has a good banking system.) That list was classically Turkey, the UAE and Switzerland. Today I'd add India, Qatar, Canada and Brazil and remove Switzerland.
alabastervlog 2y ago
He may issue an EO against them similar to the ones he's successfully used to bring major law firms he doesn't like to heel: ban consideration of former Harvard employees (... maybe also graduates?) for Federal jobs, revoke clearances held by anyone employed by Harvard, and ban them from Federal property. Maybe with some other creative terms thrown in to mess with universities in particular.
- SoftTalker 2y ago
  That is always a risk of working for the government. Your job exists more or less at the whims of the currently governing administration.
  - unclebucknasty 2y ago
    >Your job exists more or less at the whims of the currently governing administration. Perhaps in theory, but not in practice as a historical norm. And, certainly not for "standard" non-appointed, bureaucratic roles. It's important that we don't normalize what we're seeing here, in terms of quality or degree.
  - ajross 2y ago
    That has essentially never been a risk for a non-appointed government employee in the United States of America, at least for the past century or so. We Don't Politicize the Bureaucracy. And that was at least in part the secret sauce to our generational success, that we could immunize the workings of the government from the pique and emotion of its leadership. Or we didn't. Now we do. Kinda sucks.
    - miley_cyrus 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - const_cast 2y ago
        > You want to argue that Joe Biden didn't weaponize every branch of the bureaucracy against Republicans? He didn't. I don't know why you guys think he did. A lot of those agencies, like the Justice Department, act independently. It's not like any Republicans were jailed. This is starting to seem less like a legitimate take, and more like a strange fetish for persecution. For the record, if people like President Trump want to no longer be under the eye of Justice, they should stop doing illegal things. It seems every other American citizen has figured that out. It is shameful our own president has not.
qingcharles 2y ago
I mean, it turns out the fed has the power to pull any money from any account they wish, at any time, like they recently did with NYC.