MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Envato Elements

Author Topic: Not applauding is treason?  (Read 7553 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Semmick Photo

« on: February 06, 2018, 05:51 »
0
Thats a bit over the top, no?

Why does he keep throwing his toys from the pram if things dont go his way? Why cant he be presidential about it?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/02/06/donald-trump-accuses-democrats-treason-not-clapping-economic/



« Reply #1 on: February 06, 2018, 06:20 »
+2
I'm waiting to see him blame the Democrats/False news outlets for the recent correction in the stock market

ShadySue

« Reply #2 on: February 06, 2018, 08:14 »
+1
I always find it amusing that Un-American seems always to be an insult, whereas, "It's not very British" is generally a send-up of Britishness, as in, "It's not very British, what?" in a very 'arch' tone.
Like when metrosexuals in Glasgow started greeting each other by kissing cheeks comme les Franais and the general public thought, "That's not very Scottish!", being a sendup of stereotypical Scottish buttoned-upness.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2018, 09:41 by ShadySue »

RAW

« Reply #3 on: February 06, 2018, 08:49 »
+7
So, if you don't applaud our beloved leader you're accused of treason.
Where have I heard that before?

RESIST

« Reply #4 on: February 06, 2018, 09:01 »
+2
I always find it amusing that Un-American seems always to be an insult, whereas, "It's not very British" is generally a send-up, as in, "It's not very British, what?" in a very 'arch' tone.
I can't think of a personality as "un British" as Trump

Shelma1

« Reply #5 on: February 06, 2018, 09:09 »
+1
Did everyone see the video of him getting on the plane with the wind exposing his almost completely bald head? Don't watch it while eating, is all I can say.

« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2018, 09:25 »
+6
In the United States of Trump, not clapping is definitely treason.

Why cant he be presidential about it?

Because he's a narcissistic psychopath - he simply can't help it and at age 71 is not about to change even if he could.  It is so weird that people are still waiting for him to somehow morph into something presidential.  With Trump what you see is what you get and all there is.  His supporters love him for that and the rest of us - don't.

niktol

« Reply #7 on: February 06, 2018, 09:25 »
+3
Did everyone see the video of him getting on the plane with the wind exposing his almost completely bald head? Don't watch it while eating, is all I can say.

Good thing when I eat I can't see my bald head  ;)

« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2018, 10:00 »
+6
You must stand for the National Anthem. You must applaud for the President when he speaks.

Welcome to the Democratic People's Republic of America.

« Reply #9 on: February 06, 2018, 11:32 »
+7
I figure Trump is just trolling. Toss out some bait and see if the Dem's or media will bite. As with good satire, good troll bait has to have a little element of truth and a little element of conflict to be effective. The elements here include applause/support and no applause/disrespect and Trump/country.

« Reply #10 on: February 06, 2018, 12:33 »
+1
You must stand for the National Anthem. You must applaud for the President when he speaks.

Welcome to the Democratic People's Republic of America.

... Our kids must "pledge their allegiance", every morning before the school starts.
No different than the brainwashing so specific to communist or fascists dictatorships.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2018, 12:40 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #11 on: February 06, 2018, 19:37 »
+5
You must stand for the National Anthem. You must applaud for the President when he speaks.

Welcome to the Democratic People's Republic of America.

And in today's news, he wants military parades.

It's just a matter of time before we are issued a list of acceptable haircuts for all men in the country. Considering the source, I can only imagine they'd be heavy on the comb-over and recommended paired with an orange spray-tan.

RAW

« Reply #12 on: February 07, 2018, 14:00 »
+3
We're having a military parade Yipeee!

No healthcare plan (what happened to 'repeal and replace' the GOP mantra) but let's get those nukes on parade!

Jolly good.
Jolly, jolly good.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #13 on: February 07, 2018, 14:27 »
+1
Stan is right, he is just messing around, trolling on purpose to see if some people are imbeciles enough to take notice, looking for reactions!

« Reply #14 on: February 07, 2018, 14:41 »
+1
Stan is right, he is just messing around, trolling on purpose to see if some people are imbeciles enough to take notice, looking for reactions!
It certainly worked here on MSG

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #15 on: February 07, 2018, 14:46 »
0
Stan is right, he is just messing around, trolling on purpose to see if some people are imbeciles enough to take notice, looking for reactions!
It certainly worked here on MSG

Youre right! certainly did!!  works perfect with the lefties/libs as well. He winds them up and they spin around and around! ;D
« Last Edit: February 07, 2018, 16:17 by derek »

« Reply #16 on: February 07, 2018, 16:18 »
+4
Stan is right, he is just messing around, trolling on purpose to see if some people are imbeciles enough to take notice, looking for reactions!

Yep, I bet he would have loved to be a stand-up comedian or a reality TV star, able to "mess around" without consequences.
Meanwhile he is president. Not a troll on a some forum. Everything he says matters and has consequences.
And all he is doing and saying is a real "mess", indeed. Not so much "just messing around".

There are much better people at "messing around" than our "Moron in Chief": https://youtu.be/hSCAHKy61-M

Enjoy!  :P
« Last Edit: February 07, 2018, 19:53 by Zero Talent »

namussi

« Reply #17 on: February 08, 2018, 02:23 »
+1
Stan is right, he is just messing around, trolling on purpose to see if some people are imbeciles enough to take notice, looking for reactions!

Funny how you seem to understand that so well.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #18 on: February 08, 2018, 02:28 »
+1
Stan is right, he is just messing around, trolling on purpose to see if some people are imbeciles enough to take notice, looking for reactions!

Yep, I bet he would have loved to be a stand-up comedian or a reality TV star, able to "mess around" without consequences.
Meanwhile he is president. Not a troll on a some forum. Everything he says matters and has consequences.
And all he is doing and saying is a real "mess", indeed. Not so much "just messing around".

There are much better people at "messing around" than our "Moron in Chief": https://youtu.be/hSCAHKy61-M

Enjoy!  :P

Well I would like to be that sort of a moron! business-man worth 5 billion bucks, makes poor Oringer look like a beginner! Let me tell you Zero just to quote a famous quote, you dont become super-rich by being stupid!
If he was to walk around all stiff and dignified well-spoken eloquent well then the leftie/lib brigade would find something wrong with that calling him snobbish or whatever.
If IS blow up a bus in the Alps his Trumps fault, if a car has a flat-tyre its Trumps fault, if an englishman dont like Haggis its Trumps fault??  people never tire do they. Trump didnt come to the MSG but some people here introduce Trump to the MSG and for what............??

Meanwhile yes I can understand you I presume youre from the US which I personally still think is one of the greatest countries in the world and especially when you compare it to poverty stricken and cretin-like Europe! unfortunately! :)
« Last Edit: February 08, 2018, 02:31 by derek »


SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #20 on: February 08, 2018, 03:36 »
+2
Nobody really knows how much the guy is worth. Estimates range in the millions to up to 10 billion. If we go by Forbes for consistency, who are quite generous with their estimates (ranging between $1bn and $4bn since 1988), he's worth $3.1 billion. In 2013, also according to Forbes, he was worth $3.2 billion. Not a massive drop comparatively... but that means he's lost $100 million in four years. Not the best advertisement of his business skills, especially when you take inflation into account.

And Forbes again say that he was worth $1 billion in 1988. Accounting for inflation, that's over $2 billion today... so a 50% increase in 30 years isn't all that much to write home about. Take this excerpt from 

"Business Week estimated Trumps net worth at $100 million in 1978. If Trump had merely put that money in an index fund based on the Standard & Poor's 500 index the kind many Americans use to save for retirement he would be worth $6 billion today."

Take his $1bn from '88 and stick it in the same index and he's be considerably wealthier than he is now. Bill Gates on the other hand... he also had $1bn back in 1988. He's now worth $92bn though.

Bottom line? If you'd make more putting all your money in a savings account than you would doing what you're doing... are you really all that good of a businessman? Fair enough... the $100 he managed to turn into $1bn between 78 and 88 was pretty impressive. He was no doubt a decent enough businessman prior to '88 (with considerable help from his father's name and line of credit), but after that... well, he's not really 'all that' is he?

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #21 on: February 08, 2018, 03:44 »
+2
Just to add to Pauws99's excellent and succinct post... according to the CIA, 9% of the population of the Europe Union live below the poverty line. In the USA it's 15%. Just so you know! Although I admire many aspects of the USA, there are also many that I don't. You you can feel it's the greatest country in the world if you like (or one of the greatest)... but the facts differ slightly.

namussi

« Reply #22 on: February 08, 2018, 03:56 »
0
Nobody really knows how much the guy is worth. Estimates range in the millions to up to 10 billion. If we go by Forbes for consistency, who are quite generous with their estimates (ranging between $1bn and $4bn since 1988), he's worth $3.1 billion. In 2013, also according to Forbes, he was worth $3.2 billion. Not a massive drop comparatively... but that means he's lost $100 million in four years. Not the best advertisement of his business skills, especially when you take inflation into account.

And Forbes again say that he was worth $1 billion in 1988. Accounting for inflation, that's over $2 billion today... so a 50% increase in 30 years isn't all that much to write home about. Take this excerpt from 

"Business Week estimated Trumps net worth at $100 million in 1978. If Trump had merely put that money in an index fund based on the Standard & Poor's 500 index the kind many Americans use to save for retirement he would be worth $6 billion today."

Take his $1bn from '88 and stick it in the same index and he's be considerably wealthier than he is now. Bill Gates on the other hand... he also had $1bn back in 1988. He's now worth $92bn though.

Bottom line? If you'd make more putting all your money in a savings account than you would doing what you're doing... are you really all that good of a businessman? Fair enough... the $100 he managed to turn into $1bn between 78 and 88 was pretty impressive. He was no doubt a decent enough businessman prior to '88 (with considerable help from his father's name and line of credit), but after that... well, he's not really 'all that' is he?

But another angle that's often ignored: how much did Trump consume during this time?

Perhaps he would be much much richer if he'd just saved and invested more and spent less of his gains.


SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #24 on: February 08, 2018, 04:49 »
+1
Nobody really knows how much the guy is worth. Estimates range in the millions to up to 10 billion. If we go by Forbes for consistency, who are quite generous with their estimates (ranging between $1bn and $4bn since 1988), he's worth $3.1 billion. In 2013, also according to Forbes, he was worth $3.2 billion. Not a massive drop comparatively... but that means he's lost $100 million in four years. Not the best advertisement of his business skills, especially when you take inflation into account.

And Forbes again say that he was worth $1 billion in 1988. Accounting for inflation, that's over $2 billion today... so a 50% increase in 30 years isn't all that much to write home about. Take this excerpt from 

"Business Week estimated Trumps net worth at $100 million in 1978. If Trump had merely put that money in an index fund based on the Standard & Poor's 500 index the kind many Americans use to save for retirement he would be worth $6 billion today."

Take his $1bn from '88 and stick it in the same index and he's be considerably wealthier than he is now. Bill Gates on the other hand... he also had $1bn back in 1988. He's now worth $92bn though.

Bottom line? If you'd make more putting all your money in a savings account than you would doing what you're doing... are you really all that good of a businessman? Fair enough... the $100 he managed to turn into $1bn between 78 and 88 was pretty impressive. He was no doubt a decent enough businessman prior to '88 (with considerable help from his father's name and line of credit), but after that... well, he's not really 'all that' is he?

But another angle that's often ignored: how much did Trump consume during this time?

Perhaps he would be much much richer if he'd just saved and invested more and spent less of his gains.

Well if the thing about putting his money in a savings account is true... he could have retired in 1978, sat on some island somewhere and spent $1.3m a week, every week... and he'd be just as wealthy as he is now. Without having to do any work. 

« Reply #25 on: February 08, 2018, 05:45 »
+1
Well if the thing about putting his money in a savings account is true... he could have retired in 1978, sat on some island somewhere and spent $1.3m a week, every week... and he'd be just as wealthy as he is now. Without having to do any work.

Well, that calculation only works if he spends $0.  ;)

If he spent $1.3 million per week, which would have been around $350,000 a week in 1978, he would only have had $82 million + 8.9% of the average total capital in 1979... and so on.

He would have gained $8 million from S&P, but spent $18 million, starting the next year with only $90 million to take from (and get S&P gains from).

At that rate, he would be living on the streets in the 80s (by 1985).

You forget that people also spend money on food, housing, travel, cars. Rich people spend even more.

---

A 30x increase over 40 years (S&P) is 8.9% per year.

If you spend 18.2% per year ($350k per week in 1978) without income you quickly go down to zero.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2018, 07:17 by increasingdifficulty »

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #26 on: February 08, 2018, 05:50 »
0
Ok, $1.3m but make sure to take inflation into account.

$350K a week still isn't that bad. Especially if your happy meal was a lot cheaper back then as well.

« Reply #27 on: February 08, 2018, 05:53 »
+1
Ok, $1.3m but make sure to take inflation into account.

$350K a week still isn't that bad. Especially if your happy meal was a lot cheaper back then as well.

That was with inflation.

$350k a week starting in 1978 means being broke in the 80s (1985 to be exact). You don't want to be broke in the 80s. Too much cool stuff.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2018, 06:22 by increasingdifficulty »

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #28 on: February 08, 2018, 07:19 »
+1
Ok, well start in the late 80's when he had his first billion. The point is that he's not exactly this amazing businessman that some people make him out to be. A lot of people would probably be considerably wealthier than him if they started with the same money and connections back in the 70's and 80's.

« Reply #29 on: February 08, 2018, 07:24 »
+1
Ok, well start in the late 80's when he had his first billion. The point is that he's not exactly this amazing businessman that some people make him out to be. A lot of people would probably be considerably wealthier than him if they started with the same money and connections back in the 70's and 80's.

Not commenting on politics or business skills. I try to stay away from that.

But I just had to get the math right. Can't stay away from that. :)

niktol

« Reply #30 on: February 08, 2018, 07:39 »
0

« Reply #31 on: February 08, 2018, 08:42 »
+2
Stan is right, he is just messing around, trolling on purpose to see if some people are imbeciles enough to take notice, looking for reactions!

Yep, I bet he would have loved to be a stand-up comedian or a reality TV star, able to "mess around" without consequences.
Meanwhile he is president. Not a troll on a some forum. Everything he says matters and has consequences.
And all he is doing and saying is a real "mess", indeed. Not so much "just messing around".

There are much better people at "messing around" than our "Moron in Chief": https://youtu.be/hSCAHKy61-M

Enjoy!  :P

Well I would like to be that sort of a moron! business-man worth 5 billion bucks, makes poor Oringer look like a beginner! Let me tell you Zero just to quote a famous quote, you dont become super-rich by being stupid!
If he was to walk around all stiff and dignified well-spoken eloquent well then the leftie/lib brigade would find something wrong with that calling him snobbish or whatever.
If IS blow up a bus in the Alps his Trumps fault, if a car has a flat-tyre its Trumps fault, if an englishman dont like Haggis its Trumps fault??  people never tire do they. Trump didnt come to the MSG but some people here introduce Trump to the MSG and for what............??

Meanwhile yes I can understand you I presume youre from the US which I personally still think is one of the greatest countries in the world and especially when you compare it to poverty stricken and cretin-like Europe! unfortunately! :)

The only thing your post is proving is that rich morons do exist. And I have to agree with you.

The problem we have is that a rich moron became president, because other morons and wannabe morons assumed that rich and moron are mutually exclusive. We have solid proof now, that the assumption was a delusion.

On the other hand, president and moron should have been mutually exclusive. Unfortunately, the reality is contradicting, every day, this assumption, as well.

And now we have a rich man as "Moron in Chief".
« Last Edit: February 08, 2018, 08:50 by Zero Talent »

Microstock InsiderEnvato Elements

 

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

Envato Elements