Trump: In the gaming industry, everyone is going bust

Masterful BS Artist Trump.... (2.50 / 2)

He owned "100%" then "took it public.   That means he made tons of money off of the shareholders at the get go.   When he talks about the "reasonable offer" to buy it out you have to wonder how reasonable it was if the company would rather go bankrupt than sell out to Trump at pennies on the dollar.

Rest assured that Trump will do all he can to exploit this downturn to his advantage.   Predatory dog eat dog capitalism is the name of his game.  And it's all 100% perfectly legal...only the honest law abiding wokring stiffs who played by the rules are getting screwed by this economy.    The sharks will be making out like bandits.

If we stay on this trajectory......the richest of the rich will get even richer as they mop up all the cheap assets and the middle classes and the poor will become even more poor.  We're on the road to becoming a third world type nation consisting of masses of peons and a few super rich... with a very large "security apparatus" to repress any "troublemakers".  

 

---

by: Nick Lento @ Thu Feb 19, 2009 at 22:46:41 PM UTC

One "Masterful BS Artist" comments on another (0.00 / 0)

Nick,

I'm not sure if you fully understand the situation with the three casinos once owned by Donald Trump. The casinos filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, which allows them to restructure the business and obtain loans on favorable terms by giving lenders first priority on the business' earnings. It also stops all creditors from exercising collection rights. Most importantly, it allows the current managers to continue managing.

Critics of Chapter 11 believe that this type of bankruptcy damages the economy because it is not likely for the failing managers to be fired in this situation. If you agree with this criticism, then by logic it is not Trump that is exploiting the legal system. The managers, in part responsible for the company's downturn, will be able to maintain their job. The opposing argument would contend that Chapter 11 allows troubled corporations to outlast industry-wide, or national, recession. Additionally, if the corporation is an engine of profitability in a better economic environment, then our legal system has an obligation to protect them from collapse.

Also, another important factor of Chapter 11 is that it does not require the corporation to liquidate and hand-over their assets to their creditors, as in Chapter 7. Therefore, under Chapter 11, there will be no movement of assets. Your argument about the transfer of assets, in relation to these casinos, resulting in an inequitable distribution of wealth is ignoratio elenchi.

Finally, it is very easy to criticize a system that rewards hard workers in addition to those that manipulate the system. However, the opportunity for manipulation is far greater in economic systems other than capitalism. What diminishes this opportunity is a strong legal system- perhaps the topic on another argument.

I recommend reading "Atlas Shrugged."

---

by: jabay @ Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 19:56:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

We Can Agree On Trump At Least! (0.00 / 0)

I don't doubt that the manager's are also at fault in some way.  

If you're an Ayn Rand fan you might agree with me that individual initiative and risk taking should be rewarded.   That's called free enterprise, and that's a good thing.

The kind of crony/predatory/monopoly "capitalism" that has gotten into the mess we're in is the moral/ethical (if not the "legal") equivalent of organized crime.

Without sane and sound government regulation, free enterprise will inexorably morph into the kind of perverse/toxic "capitalism" that we see dominating our economy and our politics.    As you may know, even Alan Greenspan (who knew Rand well) has come around to admitting that his world view was/is mistaken.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

---

by: Nick Lento @ Sat Feb 21, 2009 at 19:40:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree.... (0.00 / 0)

Well said Nick,

Free enterprise is the basis of any good economy. Capitalism, by theory, is the only known economic system that truely fosters its risk-reward mechanism. However, any student of jurisprudence knows that a free market economic system is largely dependent on a strong legal system.

As you stated, we are in desperate need of "sane and sound government regulation." But in all fairness, we must acknowledge that economics, and consequentially the law associated with it, is nothing more than a social experiment. The infinite amount of factors influencing the economy, along with a natural lack of legal and economic precedence, makes finding regulatory balance nearly impossible.

In addition, regulation adds significant complication to markets, and often businesses will have incentive to exploit outdated or ill-conceived legislation, as well as lobby for its preservation. This type of legal corruption tests our systems that much more.

For the sake of repeating myself... Regulation is already a toilsome art form and when we add the burden of politics, society is left with a Gordian knot.

These are the reasons why Thomas More's country of Utopia remains imaginary.

---

by: jabay @ Sat Feb 21, 2009 at 21:24:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]