| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On October 20 2016 05:24 Barrin wrote: This is absolutely not unique to the Clinton Foundation. So is the possible corruption that they used the Clinton Foundation and it would be okay with a different foundation? | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9163 Posts
How did CNN not make a big deal out of this pro globalism and open borders op-ed that Trump wrote for them in 2013 What has been made clear by current events and financial upheavals since 2008 is that the global economy has become truly that -- global. The near meltdown we experienced a few years ago made it clear that our economic health depended on dependence on each other to do the right thing. We are now closer to having an economic community in the best sense of the term -- we work with each other for the benefit of all. I think we've all become aware of the fact that our cultures and economics are intertwined. It's a complex mosaic that cannot be approached with a simple formula for the correct pattern to emerge. In many ways, we are in unchartered [sic] waters. The good news, in one respect, is that what is done affects us all. There won't be any winners or losers as this is not a competition. It's a time for working together for the best of all involved. Never before has the phrase "we're all in this together" had more resonance or relevance. My concern is that the negligence of a few will adversely affect the majority. I've long been a believer in the "look at the solution, not the problem" theory. In this case, the solution is clear. We will have to leave borders behind and go for global unity when it comes to financial stability. Is this possible? Is this a new frontier? Yes and no. There is the fait accompli strategy -- stay under the radar -- and the passive aggressive strategy, acts of terror used to paralyze and so on -- so the bottom line must be balance. Rationality must rule. There are philosophical approaches to economics. However, at this point, we don't so much need philosophy as we need action. Which way to proceed is the question. You ask about Europe in crisis as an opportunity for investment. I see the world in crisis at the moment. I'm a firm believer that there are always opportunities whether the markets or up or down, but it requires insight and sometimes creativity to see those opportunities. I have no doubt that the balance we need will be achieved, but it won't happen overnight. Europe is a tapestry that is dense, colorful and deserving of continued longevity and prosperity. There are many pieces that must be carefully fitted together in order to thrive. Our challenge is to acknowledge those pieces and to see how they can form a whole that works together well without losing any cultural flavor in the process. It's a combination of preservation along with forward thinking. Europe is a terrific place for investment. I am proud to have built a great golf course in Scotland after searching throughout Europe for five years for the right location. I've seen many beautiful places. The future of Europe, as well as the United States, depends on a cohesive global economy. All of us must work toward together toward [sic] that very significant common goal. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On October 20 2016 05:26 Barrin wrote: No it would not be okay with a different foundation. Have I seem to have implied this anywhere? No you did not, I'm just trying to piece together what of these actions could possibly be corruption so that instead of waiting on GH to bring proof I can look myself. So we need proof that Bill was going to make an apartment, proof that the apartment had to cost about 10million, and proof that the cost of the penthouse apartment is higher than 6million. And if we get all this, then we have the possibility of corruption present? Did I miss anything? | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On October 20 2016 05:31 LegalLord wrote: Given all the criticisms you could levy against Trump, flip-flopping on globalization seems almost irrelevant in comparison. it does get at the core of his candidacy though. a lot of the problems with trump are his personal indiscretions and failings, but this undermines his entire MAGA america first schtick. | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9163 Posts
On October 20 2016 05:31 LegalLord wrote: Given all the criticisms you could levy against Trump, flip-flopping on globalization seems almost irrelevant in comparison. It completes the circle. I don't think there's a single thing left in his platform that he hasn't argued against in the past, not in his youth, in his damn 60s | ||
KwarK
United States43513 Posts
On October 20 2016 05:31 Barrin wrote: Is it not established that whatever the suite cost came from the $10m they donated to the foundation? I guess not actually, but I do think it's fair to say. No, it's not. That's what makes this whole theory so strange. The idea that they donated $10m that they didn't have to in order to get an apartment that they would have gotten anyway as a way of saving money is really strange. If they were able to raise $125m of other peoples' money to build a library around the apartment they wanted for themselves in order to make the apartment tax deductible then why didn't they use that $125m to build the apartment in the first place (along with a slightly cheaper library). If we go all the way back to the start GH was arguing that they donated $10m to the CFF which was corruption because they got a tax break from the $10m while also getting use out of it. The tax break was $3m-ish so the loss was $7m which means that to break even they would need to get $7m of utility out of that specific donation, on top of what they would have gotten anyway from the funds already in the CFF. If we assume that their $10m was commingled with the $125m already within the fund then to get $7m of utility out of the donation would require a $95m apartment (10/135 = proportion of money the Clintons put in personally, 7/(10/135) = cost of apartment for which their share would be equivalent to $7m). And we're still doing this assuming that the apartment was only built because of the extra injection of $10m by the Clintons. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On October 20 2016 05:34 Dan HH wrote: It completes the circle. I don't think there's a single thing left in his platform that he hasn't argued against in the past, not in his youth, hi his damn 60s It's always been clear that Trump's relation with the truth has been tenuous at best. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On October 20 2016 05:31 Thieving Magpie wrote: No you did not, I'm just trying to piece together what of these actions could possibly be corruption so that instead of waiting on GH to bring proof I can look myself. So we need proof that Bill was going to make an apartment, proof that the apartment had to cost about 10million, and proof that the cost of the penthouse apartment is higher than 6million. And if we get all this, then we have the possibility of corruption present? Did I miss anything? The other nuance is that a Library dedicated to an ex-President probably benefits from sometimes housing said ex-President. So the other factor is if "residence of Bill Clinton" was a discussed and analyzed selling point during design and construction. Checking on Obama's Library plans, several cities and locations pitched themselves as construction sites, so attracting further infrastructure growth is also part of the planning. | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/19/us/politics/melania-trump-bill-clinton.html?smid=tw-nytnational&smtyp=cur | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
KwarK
United States43513 Posts
On October 20 2016 05:48 Barrin wrote: Think of it this way: I have to eat tonight. Tonight we're going out to eat together. I gave you $10 a while ago, not really expecting you to pay me back. My dinner tonight cost $15. You pick up the entire bill. How much do you expect me to pay you back? Not a perfect analogy I guess, but do you get the idea? Sorry, I don't get it, not even slightly. Could you please paint me a scenario in which the Clintons come out ahead from donating the $10m to the CFF due to the apartment? For the purposes of simplicity lets assume the CFF starts with $125m of other peoples' money in it and that donating $10m to the CFF costs them $7m (-$10m + $3m tax break). What I'm looking for is an explanation of how the benefits gained from donating that additional $10m were greater than the $7m cost of it. So, for example, a scenario in which the $125m fund has $0 value to the Clinton family but a $135m fund has $10m value to them would qualify as the donation being of benefit to them. A scenario in which the $125m fund planned to build a $10m apartment and, once it became a $135m fund increased the planned apartment to $12m would not qualify because they would still come out $5m behind. | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On October 20 2016 05:48 Barrin wrote: Think of it this way: I have to eat tonight. Tonight we're going out to eat together. I gave you $10 a while ago, not really expecting you to pay me back. My dinner tonight cost $15. You pick up the entire bill. How much do you expect me to pay you back? Not a perfect analogy I guess, but do you get the idea? On a lighter shitposty note, how many hoes could Bill fit in a 2000 sq foot apartment. Since were doing math. On a more serious note, anyone notice Kellyanne Conway losing her poise enough to say "Drumpf has a 5 point plan against Islam." ? She obviously misspoke but I mean if were going to jump on deplorables, then this should be fair game to. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3852020/Drumpf-s-campaign-manager-says-five-point-plan-defeat-Islam-not-ISIS-takes-early-morning-TV-interviews-near-site-final-debate.html Was the same interview she said elections not rigged. | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
KwarK
United States43513 Posts
On October 20 2016 06:00 Barrin wrote: Easy. 1) Mr. Clinton wanted an apartment anyway. 2) The cost of the penthouse apartment is greater than $7m. $10m, for example. You're still not understanding. 1) Mr. Clinton wants an apartment. 2) Mr. Clinton has $125m to build a presidential library, apartment optional. 3) Mr. Clinton builds a presidential library with an apartment. 4) Mr. Clinton now has an apartment. 5) Mr. Clinton still has his $7m What you explicitly need to explain is why there was an increase of over $7m in the utility provided to the Clintons from the pre-existing utility of the money in the fund through their additional donation of $10m. That's what you're missing. Your explanation of him wanting an apartment anyway and buying one through his donations to the foundation doesn't make sense because if he wanted to save money on the cost of the apartment he'd just buy one with the money already in the foundation without putting more of his own in. There has to be a $7m gain over what he could already do with the $125m he already had to put him ahead by putting $10m of his own in. Why was the apartment he could get with $135m in the library fund (of which $10m were provided by him) $7m better than the apartment he could get with $125m in the library fund (of which $0m were provided by him)? | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On October 20 2016 05:55 Rebs wrote: On a lighter shitposty note, how many hoes could Bill fit in a 2000 sq foot apartment. Since were doing math. On a more serious note, anyone notice Kellyanne Conway losing her poise enough to say "Drumpf has a 5 point plan against Islam." ? She obviously misspoke but I mean if were going to jump on deplorables, then this should be fair game to. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3852020/Drumpf-s-campaign-manager-says-five-point-plan-defeat-Islam-not-ISIS-takes-early-morning-TV-interviews-near-site-final-debate.html Was the same interview she said elections not rigged. Its theoretically infinite since Bill doesn't need his bill in their wallets at the same time. Just have a conveyor belt of people coming and going as Bill continually comes and goes. | ||
| ||
|
|
|
EPT
