Oh come on, I cannot belive Cruz is this stupid! I can believe he is this desperate to win the big prize he has deluded himself into thinking he is destined for, however.
Let’s just put it in simple terms that even Cruzinistas can understand. Let’s say a person has an income of $100,000 per year and buys a car that costs $20,000. That means the person owes the bank 20% of his annual income.
Trump Enterprises has annual income of about $9.5 billion. And while business and personal finance is obviously different, having the same amount of debt would mean the company owes the banks around $2 billion at any point in time. These loans can be for lots of purposes, working capital, to offset other investments, -advances on construction of new properties that aren’t yet paying back a return, etc. Any intelligent person knows how this works, and all businesses operate with some debt because they seldom get paid (income) before some product or service has to be produced.
So either Cruz knows this and is purposely lying (again) or being deceptive (again) or he’s clueless about finance, in which case he doens’t belong in the Senate, much less in the the White House.
Trump's net worth is roughly equal to only one year of his net income? It ought to be some significant multiple thereof. Either the Donald is worth a lot MORE than he's claiming (which would be an unusual claim for him), or he's hugely underachieving (which I doubt), or he's a minority owner of Trump Enterprises (so his wealth is a multiple of some fraction of your $9.5B), or something's wrong with your statement. Did you mean to say it has an annual cash flow of $9.5B rather than 'annual income?'
That's not a good analogy for what Cruz did. He had the assets, but the interest on the loan was cheaper than the costs involved with selling the stock (and paying the penalties, if it was a retirement account, which seems likely.)
So you justify Trump saying Ted Cruz is owned by banks because he borrowed a million bucks with his retirement account as collateral, (fully secured loan)
But Trump is not owned by the banks when he borrows a hundred times as much on a speculative loan and declares bankruptcy when he cannot pay!
Me thinks you are so biased you are not thinking.
So i read your post and have no idea what you’re trying to say. Is there a difference between owing 20% in either case regardless of how its paid off or it’s uses?
The difference i see is one is a loan and the others borrowings are in the form of a bond. Its a legal differentiation more in form than substance.
Are you saying the use of the money somehow differentiates the monies? Is a business loan more noble than a personal loan to run for the Senate?
Is a business having debt different than an individual with with a loan?
Are you saying it’s okay to borrow against business activities but not for personal ones?
Please explain to me. I see the passion in your response but can’t understand your point.
Try to not talk over my head. I’ve only been trading bonds for over 30 years so i’m still a little green in the world of finance.