4 ms·

It won’t help. At my second job the president hired a VP with a white collar criminal record and told everyone not to bring it up

Ma8ee 8mo ago
The POTUS is well known for screwing over contractors and lenders. It clearly didn't damage his reputation enough.
- red-iron-pine 8mo ago
  arguably is the reason why his business kept failing. you can only screw over suppliers a couple of times before the word gets out and no one wants to do business with you. now they want the cash up front, and with sizable markups to CYA. a reasonable person would try to unfuck that perception; instead Trump double-down on the grift
- mrguyorama 8mo ago
  The most insane part of that is all the generally "normal" businesses who signed contracts with him despite this well publicized history. People like law firms with long histories. Trump has always preferred dragging out a court battle to actually signing a small check for services rendered, and outright brags about it. He explicitly believes stiffing your contractors is what "Good business" means. Because he is a selfish child and getting stuff for free is his worldview. But utter morons still line up to get shafted. I just don't understand. I couldn't get a car loan because I have no credit history even though I had enough cash in the bank to buy the car yet people will still line up to suck the toe of someone with a known history of successfully screwing all their business partners. Same with how his administration is full of people who don't recognize he will happily throw them under the bus for any reason even though that's all he has done for the past decade. There is just a shocking inability for the common person to connect people to their history in the USA. The guy who started a trade war and caused prices to increase was voted in because prices were too high. The math don't math.
  - helpfulfrond 8mo ago
    I think it must be some form of "I'm special/better/smarter than that other person who got ripped off, I won't get taken advantage of!"
Copernicron 8mo ago
At one of my previous jobs, we were acquired by a company whose CEO had been caught for something involving bank fraud and was under a gag order not to talk about it. As far as I know they're still in business.
- sidewndr46 8mo ago
  I never have thought about it but I guess if the gag order applies to everyone in the case it's kind of convenient.
tt24 8mo ago
In your mind should people with criminal record be barred from holding jobs forever? At that point why not just exile them?
- socalgal2 8mo ago
  I knew this response would come up. Would you be okay to give Sam Bankman-Fried a leadership position? How about Martin Shkreli? Elizabeth Holmes? It's one thing to give someone that made a few minor mistakes a 2nd chance. It's another let a convicted child molester work at a kindergarden. Executives that committed fraud shouldn't be executives again.
  - tt24 8mo ago
    I don’t agree because I’m somewhat left leaning and believe in reform (except for violent crime).
    - salawat 8mo ago
      I sympathize, and also tend to the left, but please, I beg of you, redefine violence to include long term, intentional creation and operation of fraudulent or harmful enterprise. It takes energy to keep doing things wrong to that degree, and without real signs of behavioral modification that stick, the safest damn thing to do is keep them the hell away.
      - tt24 8mo ago
        Violence has a specific meaning, and twisting yourself into knots in order to define things you don't like as violence is dishonest.
    - 12_throw_away 8mo ago
      > I’m somewhat left leaning [...] Um, really? If I were to look at your comment history, what would I see? EDIT: ok, yeah, I actually checked. The threads on page 1 include: 1) this one, 2) "National sales tax would be significantly better than income tax.", 3) "Meta has made more positive contributions to society and the world than every HN commenter combined". Can you feel the left leaning?

Ma8ee 8mo ago

The POTUS is well known for screwing over contractors and lenders. It clearly didn't damage his reputation enough.

red-iron-pine 8mo ago
arguably is the reason why his business kept failing. you can only screw over suppliers a couple of times before the word gets out and no one wants to do business with you. now they want the cash up front, and with sizable markups to CYA. a reasonable person would try to unfuck that perception; instead Trump double-down on the grift
mrguyorama 8mo ago
The most insane part of that is all the generally "normal" businesses who signed contracts with him despite this well publicized history. People like law firms with long histories. Trump has always preferred dragging out a court battle to actually signing a small check for services rendered, and outright brags about it. He explicitly believes stiffing your contractors is what "Good business" means. Because he is a selfish child and getting stuff for free is his worldview. But utter morons still line up to get shafted. I just don't understand. I couldn't get a car loan because I have no credit history even though I had enough cash in the bank to buy the car yet people will still line up to suck the toe of someone with a known history of successfully screwing all their business partners. Same with how his administration is full of people who don't recognize he will happily throw them under the bus for any reason even though that's all he has done for the past decade. There is just a shocking inability for the common person to connect people to their history in the USA. The guy who started a trade war and caused prices to increase was voted in because prices were too high. The math don't math.
- helpfulfrond 8mo ago
  I think it must be some form of "I'm special/better/smarter than that other person who got ripped off, I won't get taken advantage of!"

Copernicron 8mo ago

At one of my previous jobs, we were acquired by a company whose CEO had been caught for something involving bank fraud and was under a gag order not to talk about it. As far as I know they're still in business.

sidewndr46 8mo ago
I never have thought about it but I guess if the gag order applies to everyone in the case it's kind of convenient.

tt24 8mo ago

In your mind should people with criminal record be barred from holding jobs forever? At that point why not just exile them?

socalgal2 8mo ago
I knew this response would come up. Would you be okay to give Sam Bankman-Fried a leadership position? How about Martin Shkreli? Elizabeth Holmes? It's one thing to give someone that made a few minor mistakes a 2nd chance. It's another let a convicted child molester work at a kindergarden. Executives that committed fraud shouldn't be executives again.
- tt24 8mo ago
  I don’t agree because I’m somewhat left leaning and believe in reform (except for violent crime).
  - salawat 8mo ago
    I sympathize, and also tend to the left, but please, I beg of you, redefine violence to include long term, intentional creation and operation of fraudulent or harmful enterprise. It takes energy to keep doing things wrong to that degree, and without real signs of behavioral modification that stick, the safest damn thing to do is keep them the hell away.
    - tt24 8mo ago
      Violence has a specific meaning, and twisting yourself into knots in order to define things you don't like as violence is dishonest.
  - 12_throw_away 8mo ago
    > I’m somewhat left leaning [...] Um, really? If I were to look at your comment history, what would I see? EDIT: ok, yeah, I actually checked. The threads on page 1 include: 1) this one, 2) "National sales tax would be significantly better than income tax.", 3) "Meta has made more positive contributions to society and the world than every HN commenter combined". Can you feel the left leaning?