Posted on 11/11/2015 4:31:11 AM PST by Kaslin
Sometimes I like Donald Trump. He makes me laugh when he mocks reporters' stupid questions.
Sometimes he's smart. When Maryland's lefty governor said a tax on rich people would "raise revenue," Trump told me why it wouldn't. The taxpayers would just flee: "I know these people! They're international people! Whether they live here or in a place like Switzerland, it doesn't really matter to them!"
Perfect TV sound bite. And accurate. Maryland's tax on the rich brought in less revenue.
When Trump makes billions by giving people things they want in voluntary exchanges -- via casinos or real estate or the chance to watch him "fire" people on TV shows -- I applaud him. Free trade is mutually beneficial. Everybody wins.
That's why it's appalling when Trump calls trade agreements a "disaster" and says he'd "punish" Mexico with higher tariffs (tariffs really punish Americans).
And it's appalling when Trump uses connections with government to take things from others. I confronted him about that once.
In Atlantic City, an elderly woman named Vera Coking owned a home near Trump's casino. Trump wanted to take down her house so he could expand his casino parking lot.
People had offered to buy Vera's house, but she said no. In America, property rights mean you get to tell people, "You can't use my things without my permission."
But Trump wouldn't take no for an answer. He got some New Jersey politicians to grant him the right to take Vera's house. Politicians can do that under a law called "eminent domain." Trump recently called eminent domain "wonderful!"
Eminent domain can be wonderful if it's put to important public use, say, claiming land for highways, railroads or a pipeline. But Trump got New Jersey pols to use it so he'd have a better space for limousines to park.
Also, under eminent domain, the state is supposed to pay the property owner "just compensation." But Vera had turned down a million-dollar offer. Instead of raising the bid, Trump got politicians to force Vera to sell for even less. Trump would have to pay just $251,000, a fourth what she'd been offered.
That made Trump a manipulative bully. So I told him that.
"In the old days, developers came in with thugs with clubs. Now you use lawyers!"
"Excuse me! Other people maybe use thugs today. I don't!" was Trump's angry answer. "For you to use the word 'bully,' John, is very unfair. ... It's a pretty sick assumption, and I think it's pretty jaded for you to make it."
Vintage Trump.
He is right. I'm pretty jaded. Watching big shots violate people's property rights tends to do that.
Fortunately, after a long legal battle, an appeals court ruled that Trump could not take Vera's property. That worked best for everyone since it turned out that Trump didn't need a bigger parking lot. Trump and New Jersey pols hadn't predicted the future. His casino, like others in Atlantic City, went bankrupt.
Bankruptcy happens in business all the time, and only investors lose. But when business "partners" with government, innocent people get trampled.
Trump also tried to use his "get politicians to grab someone's land" scheme in Bridgeport, Connecticut, where he promised a "world-class" development that never happened.
This is "a powerful, politically influential person using his power to steal, essentially, somebody else's private property for his own private profit," says Tim Sandefur of the Pacific Legal Foundation.
But Trump said that his development might bring the city extra tax money, making it "public" use.
"By that logic," says Sandefur, "you can use the power of eminent domain to kick all poor people out of your city. ... The whole purpose of protections against eminent domain in our Constitution -- in fact, the very purpose of a Constitution -- is to protect people who don't have political influence and can't persuade politicians to do their bidding."
I wish Trump understood that. He isn't the only one whose ego is huge. So is government's -- always thinking it knows best.
Let property owners decide, not the bullies.
He offered the woman $1.9 million. She turned it down. She kept the house. What, exactly, is the problem? The news stories never include those points.
Trump is the only candidate, saying Americans need to bring back American jobs.
That is a very strong argument.
RUNNING AS A AMERICAN!
Liz, Trump offered her 1.9 million - for the record. A lot of anti-Trump freepers keep lowballing his offer.
Love this pix. I remember there was a bar/tavern on the east side in the 50s that refused to go and a skyscraper was built around it. It looked cool. I forget which street. High 50s on the eastside, I think.
I find their concern quite touching. Interesting that they aren’t concerned with the invasion on our southern border.
you are an abject liar.....just like the Nazi’s and just like the Soviets repeating and repeating and repeating the lie....over and over and over.
Have your mommy read this to you:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/426885/flat-tax-benefits
Nope, I agree. I see Trump as a self promoting, polished realityTV star who will say whatever is necessary at the moment to get what he wants. I do not think he is a conservative and I am confident he won't be the nominee.
What goes up, will come down. In Trump's case, most likely come crashing down and it won't be pretty. There are a lot of people emotionally invested in Trump, and when he bows out of this race it is going to leave emotions more raw than anything we've seen here in a very long time. It ain't gonna be pretty, but that was the nature of "the Donald's" campaign the whole time.
Now Stossel should have clarified.... these were not "personal bankruptcies." These were debt-restructuring moves.
Trump did not file for bankruptcy and get to walk away scot-free.......restructuring debt means Trump still had to repay the money.....at even higher interest rates....b/c banks don't do these deals to be nice.
More importantly, there's a question as to whether bankruptcy was even Trump's idea---one ex-Trump exec's book recalled Trump's corporate team sometimes overruled him....to make him do things he did not want to do.
First and foremost, Trump's A/C bankruptcy benefitted banks. A Trump loan gave banks little or no risk; banks lent Trump so much money, they were literally in business w/ him. If he went down, they went down.
So restructuring the debt benefitted banks, and repayment commenced at even higher rates.
Stossel should have been more specific.
Sorry you are a complete globalist.
In my opinion, anyway.
100%
Sadly, many at FR have become duped by the message from this election cycle's version of PT Barnum.
so how is supporting a flat tax plan globalist? How is reducing taxes to zero on exports NOT GREAT FOR AMERICAN JOBS?
Oh, wait, your econ IQ can’t access the logic.
Thanks for the clarification-—the Trump offer was a whopping $1.9 mill——another Stossel stumble.
All of this makes me wonder just how serious this guy is as a presidential candidate at all.
Trump didn’t even seem to realize China was not part of the TPP trade deal.
Trump’s shtick is wearing thin. He was entertaining for awhile, but as we get closer to actual voting Trump is beginning to fade. I would not be surprised if at the next debate he is no longer center stage. And if Trump falls decidedly into 2nd, 3rd or 4th place I do not even believe he will make it too Iowa.
I notice a lot of the globalists on FR are climbing on the anti-Trump bandwagon.
Rooting for who please?
Cruz?
He’s a good choice, but not standing up for American jobs.
Trump may not deliver on anything when he is President. But the American people are demonstrating what they want when they support Trump. What they want is a pro American Nationalist as President. If the product turns out to be defective doesn’t make pro American Nationalist citizens wrong, they will have to find a new champion, not a new cause.
The political, media and financial elites have been pushing their “we need more immigration propaganda” at citizens for so long that anyone with the guts to stand up to them on this highly important issue that is changing the face of America gets my vote. Have you noticed how they’ve shut up Ann Coulter?
And the issue of eminent domain by corporate interests (and especially foreign corporations) is so grossly anti conservative is the reason why I strongly oppose Keystone XL regardless if some tout it.
I have had this gut feeling all along that Trump is in this for some ulterior motive. I can’t—and don’t— trust him, try as I might.
More times than not, he reminds me of a carnival barker.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.