Dagnabbit

Two wrongs do not make a right.

he is starting to believe everyone is a hillbilly to believe his b/s
when the truth comes out in time will find he owes more in loans placed through Putin mob
launder through Spain / Arab banks
he was blackballed many years ago with USA banks after to many loan faults

 
We were talking specifically about Elon Musk. He already made his money. After that he, by all accounts, has a dual purpose: to improve society and make money doing it—if only to show others that it doesn't *have* to be either/or
 
T

Lower the reserve, get bidders bidding, they'll likely still make the 11 mill

Sent from my SM-A720F using Tapatalk

Rich/poor divide?

Should people in govt housing be given Ferarris?

What is this divisive nonsense?

Of course millionaires will live in better conditions than those on handouts.

The rich are not responsible for this, the govt are.


Sent from my SM-A720F using Tapatalk

Thanks. It all makes sense now. That guy whose office I ran out of, who used his dick instead of his hand must've been a "bro-proctologist"
 
T

Thanks. It all makes sense now. That guy whose office I ran out of, who used his dick instead of his hand must've been a "bro-proctologist"
 
T

17 minutes ago, Traveler19491 said:

I suspect you meant "Pro-business". Typos happen.

I never indicated at any point that borrowing is not an oftentimes necessary business practice. Having owned my own business in the past, I realize its usefulness. However, Trump uses it as a primary means of funding his businesses, very, very few of which have ever succeeded. Ergo, it becomes a reasonable inference that he abuses it, which inference is supported by the fact that traditional channels of lending are now closed to him and he is forced to either borrow via bonds, always of junk status, or look to highly questionable and most definitely non-traditional avenues, like going to Russian oligarchs. Not necessarily a wise move, especially for a President, as that leaves him open to potential pressure.

No - I mean "Bro-business" just like "Bro-Science" - in other words a brand of reasoning based on zero education or experience deemed more credible than people that run businesses. 

As your post exemplifies. 

Hardly. Dagnabbit inserted a comment to the effect that anyone not already an enormous success in business lacked the qualifications to criticize Trump's debt. He then compared Richard Branson's failures to Trump's in an attempt to assert that Trump's were somehow legitimate. I countered, explaining that to compare Trump's business character to Branson's is ludicrous. How is that off-topic?

23 minutes ago, Traveler19491 said:

Nice totally vacuous reply. Your reading comprehension is seriously lacking. Mentioning Branson's accomplishments/business tactics in a direct reference to Trump is, in fact, a comparison. You mention Branson's failures in response to a comment about Trump's failures. How is that not a comparison? And just because it would take you 15 minutes of laborious composition to come up with something of the sort that I posted does not mean that I would suffer the same inadequacy. Nice try at an insult, but no donut. And you may not have noticed, but it's not my business acumen that is the subject of the article. Trump being a public figure leaves him open to criticism by anyone. In response to your lame question about my net worth and your belief that it disqualifies me from having and voicing an opinion, I would ask the same. How many billions do you possess that permits you the ability to assert that Trump is the success you seem to believe? The fact is that, no, I'm not a billionaire. But then, neither did my daddy leave me $200 million when he died. Had he, I strongly suspect I would be richer than Trump, because I would have had the common sense he lacks and realized that I'm not a business type, so I would have done what he didn't, and invested my money, likely in index funds, which would have made me worth at least three times what he is.

 

Come back when you can posit an insult that has some teeth.

I think you should spend a day away from the internet. I don't think any successful business person would put this much effort into something so pointless

As someone making a living from a business myself, I can tell you that borrowing is normal and the nature of new endeavors is that they are risky. Some fail.

This is why some people never try. Fear of failure and lack if experience in rusk management.

Hence all the armchair CEO's.


 

The difference is that Richard Branson is a far more noble, far more principled, far more benevolent individual than Trump will ever be. In fact, comparing Trump to Branson is like comparing Mussolini to FDR. Both were rich, both achieved the pinnacle of power in their countries, yet they were polar opposites in terms of moral character and actual long-term accomplishments. Branson gives large amounts to charity, has given his male employees one year of paid paternity leave, gives his 170 employees on his personal staff unlimited vacation (joining companies like Netflix, Ask.com, The Motley Fool, Groupon, and others). He has committed to giving half his personal wealth to charity upon his death, similar to Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, and many other billionaires. Sorry, but Trump is nothing more than a greedy, self-serving narcissist who is in it for himself, others be damned.

A lot of employees on here with zero clue about business.

No business is a sure thing. Richard Branson has had his fair share if failures. In fact, it's just part of being succesful.

Sometimes it's an entire business that fails, sometimes just a new product/service in an existing business.

The key to surviving these failures is to not put all your money into one venture. Hence you borrow, get financial backing. Then one failure doesnt destroy you.

If you never failed at something, you probably arent trying hard enough.

Sent from my SM-A720F using Tapatalk

Nope.

I have used statements from offshore accounts a number of times here to borrow money.

Earnings do not have to be related to a job or domestic.

Sent from my SM-A720F using Tapatalk

Ludicrious headline. Smart businesses use other people's money. He is not over leveraged. Yet the headline is procatively trying to make out he's up to his eyeballs in debt.

Sent from my SM-A720F using Tapatalk

I got financing on a new Benz. No work permit and just showed them paypal statements and a 50% deposit.

And I turned up in a BMW which didnt hurt...

Sent from my SM-A720F using Tapatalk

Good point - I'm in Bangkok!

I've been told by my digital marketing people that I need to appear on my websites homepage and so I've been looking for someone that can do creative headshots (and probably a bit of photoshop wrinkle removal)....

A sample they gave is here: https://decodingsuperhuman.com/ - I don't need to go so big on the background - they want something professional but accessible.

Any clues on where to find someone - I've drawn a blank so far.

20 hours ago, thaihome said:

 

 

lol - that is brilliant!

In before a liberal blames Trump!

Sent from my SM-A720F using Tapatalk

Whoever wrote this article obviously didn't watch it.

He didn't dodge any questions.

She provoked that dog somehow. The dog should be suing her.

9 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

 

I happen to like freedom of the press and freedom of speech, as allowed in the US.  How about you?

 

I agree with freedom of speech.

I agree with constitutional protection of the 4th estate.

But - I think that when the any media organisation moves outside of reporting facts and into making stuff up, they are no longer part of the 4th estate and no longer eligible for any sort of protection. They are free to say what they like but they no longer enjoy protection as valued contributors to society.

The salary men usually reside in Sukhumvit area. A businessman residing in Chaengwattana area is out of the norm.

And they chose a life of gang affiliation, drug dealing & violent crime. <deleted> 'em


Sent from my SM-A720F using Tapatalk

You can' tell me that someone who has as much business experience as Trump didn't know that trying to influence Comey was inappropriate. Any business person knows you can't ask certain questions when you are interviewing someone for a job, that certain behavior is inappropriate in a work place (sexual harassment), or you can't have private meetings with a judge who is deciding your case. At the very least he should have consulted with staff about the appropriateness BEFORE meeting with Comey. The fact that Trump went to great lengths to make sure there were no witnesses to these interactions with Comey strongly suggests that he knew full well the contacts were of an inappropriate nature.