DinkinFlicka
Erect Member
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2009
- Messages
- 29,529
- Likes
- 24,499
Oh, I see. This follows that ol' chestnut that guns don't kill people, people kill people. Thanks for helping me understand how Trump's six companies went bankrupt... seems Trump wasn't involved at all. GOT IT.
Wait, aren't corporations people? Citizens United needs to hear you validate them.
The poster was speaking in generalities of the bankrupted corps and how Trump lack of acumen as the head of these orginazations failed them.
If my business fails, it's because of my lack of leadership at the helm, not the receptionist or other staff.
These aren't half truths, you're simply unwilling to accept he's a blithering idiot that is exceptional at gifting.
Thank you for proving my point. As I said, Trump declared bankruptcy.
I win. The end.
A business can fail and not be due to the owner. Sudden change in economy, change in codes, change in supply chains, unavoidable claim that requires too much capital, competition from outside countries that artificially deflate manufacturing cost.
Many builders went under in 2009 and lost everything. Those same builders are back now that the economy WAS doing well. Construction is a very volatile industry.
Sorry guys, you dont just get to rewrite the IRS guidelines because you get the feels.
Is that what happened? Change in codes and supply chains caused trump to default on his loans six times? Looks like he's brought that cavalier mindset that bankrupted those companies straight into doing nothing to stymie our inflating deficit. Remember how he was going to reduce it because he brought his business knowledge to the Oval Office? How he pandered to fiscal conservatives because he had business experience? The only thing he's been really successful at is selling the image of success.
Thanks. Pretty much what I figured.
This is a completely different topic.
I am simply stating a corp is a self contained entity separate from the owner/member. This is why minutes must be run and commingling will cause a veil to break. If broken, it is no longer a separate entity.
I am not happy with the debt issue myself but I think that ship has sailed on all fronts.
It's not though, not really. The head of a corporation is responsible for the direction of the company, the captain of the ship if you will. The buck stops with him or her, no?
If you're going to have us believe that trump leadership isn't responsible for any of the six bankruptcies because he can't be held responsible for outside forces - then any "success" he's had in business must also be do to extraneous forces and not his acumen. Seems like you guys want it both ways.
Ford
Disney
Hersey
Heinz
Lincoln
All had businesses go under.
So next time you drive a Ford to a Disney movie and eat a Hershey's bar and a hotdogs with Heinz ketchup with any one of you African American friends you can feel superior knowing all these men are failures and u are a success.
Ford
Disney
Hersey
Heinz
Lincoln
All had businesses go under.
So next time you drive a Ford to a Disney movie and eat a Hershey's bar and a hotdogs with Heinz ketchup with any one of you African American friends you can feel superior knowing all these men are failures and u are a success.
Lol.
How do you win?
Because you feel you won.
The business declared bankruptcy hence the bankruptcy is NoWhere on his personal credit history. This is a fact.
Now you wanna talk piercing the corporate veil thate different ....then again forget it, why am I bothering with you?
Your little group on here doesn't know the first thing about business.
I am done here.
And your idea, well not yours exactly, but the idea to fix this is to qualify even more speech as hate speech? (Cant be anti conservative) It doesn't make sense and it doesnt follow the ideology of those presenting it.I don't give a **** about Trump's tweets, if that is what you're asking. It's been a problem for years. For example, people sarcastically telling fired liberal journalists to "learn to code" were given hate speech strikes and banned or had their tweets deleted a few years ago.
You are right about the porn thing. There is a line somewhere where we have to decide what acceptable community guidelines are for a supposedly open community forum/platform. That is a conversation we have to have.
And it isn't like Trump is the only one muddying the waters on this. The left's willingness to rapidly expand the definition of hate speech for example has specifically stacked the deck against having a conversation about virtually all social topics on their platform. For example, if I were to refer to a man pretending to be a woman in women's sports as a man, that is hate speech according to Twitter. That isn't right IMO.