Refilling The Trump Swamp!

[Parsad]

Doral selected as site for 2020 G7...keep lining your pockets Trumpy!  What conflict of interest? 

 

Hunter Biden has nothing on Stumpy, Lumpy, Ivanka and the Kush!  Cheers!

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50087836

[cobafdek]

There's a deep ethical chasm between getting rich before political office, and getting rich because of political office.

 

[Gregmal]

Yea its really just more hypocritical whining. First, I think in a vacuum its probably wise for Trump to avoid doing this...but otherwise. what they ALWAYS LEAVE OUT, is the real detail.

 

Its being done at cost. In other words, Trump makes no money. It saves us money in fact. At best, its free advertising for a Trump property. Which basically stacks up similarly to the free advertising every politician gets from being in office that then allows them to go make millions writing books and all that crap.

 

I also cant blame him for doing this knowing how badly it trolls all his critics. They certainly deserve it.

[stahleyp]

There's a deep ethical chasm between getting rich before political office, and getting rich because of political office.

 

 

Carter is about the only one that hasn't done that lately, I think.

[Read the Footnotes]

Yea its really just more hypocritical whining. First, I think in a vacuum its probably wise for Trump to avoid doing this...but otherwise. what they ALWAYS LEAVE OUT, is the real detail.

 

Its being done at cost. In other words, Trump makes no money. It saves us money in fact. At best, its free advertising for a Trump property. Which basically stacks up similarly to the free advertising every politician gets from being in office that then allows them to go make millions writing books and all that crap.

 

I also cant blame him for doing this knowing how badly it trolls all his critics. They certainly deserve it.

Trump Doral is in decline. There have been lots of articles written about that.

 

In 2017, the resort property missed the company's revenue targets by $10 million, taking in $75 million in revenue, while the facility's net operating income had dropped by 69 percent in just two years.

 

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/443768-trumps-doral-resort-revenue-has-dropped-since-presidential

 

If you know anything about different business models, or distressed businesses, you know that if things are bad enough even selling rooms at cost can be a big boost to profitability. For a business model example, look at Davita, they do quite well while the vast majority of services are provided at a loss to the government. All that volume being sold to the government is the secret to the profitability of the rest of their business. Volume builds economies of scale. Economies of scale make the private insurance business that much more profitable to DaVita, in addition to other competitive benefits.

 

You have to ask, if Doral were doing well, how would they even have the capacity to shut down for the government for a period of time? Plus selling out to the government will create scarcity for the other weekends and allow price hikes.

 

Finally, an event at Doral might provide marketing that would create value over decades. That marketing might not result in cash changing hands, but it does have value and that exchange of value is supposedly prohibited under US law.

 

 

[Read the Footnotes]

We should also note that "at cost" is an issue because The Trump Organization has decades of history of inflating costs to defraud the government (see the NY Times expose on that subject among others). They also have a practice of using shell companies to hide those shenanigans. I doubt there will be sufficient oversight on these issues, especially if they won't even disclose what the selection process was.

 

To return to my point from a previous post. I used DaVita as an example. DaVita has high fixed costs, and you can think of 80%+ of their business being selling beds to the government.

 

What Trump Doral has in common with DaVita is high fixed costs. The higher your fixed costs, the more it makes sense to sell capacity at break even or even to sell capacity at a loss because at least it is helping to cover your fixed costs.

 

There is one unique financial characteristic that is synonymous with the hospitality industry; that is high fixed costs.  Or another way of stating the same financial attribute is to simply state that the hospitality industry has low variable costs. There are several different cost drivers that force this industry to incur high fixed costs.  These include location, initial cost of construction, costs of capital and an economy of scale.  Each of these business attributes contribute to the high fixed costs of operations.

 

https://businessecon.org/2015/07/07/hospitality-industry-characterized-by-high-fixed-costs/

 

So if the "one unique financial characteristic" of the hospitality industry is high fixed costs, do you really think that hosting an event "at cost" at Doral really has no value for Trump?

[Gregmal]

So even some arcanely structured argument about a "subsidy" type benefit(dems love those dont they?), still, Im sure, if you care(I dont) enough to then go and quantify it, comes to what? Something that is inarguably a negligible bottom line number....plus, lets not ignore "comps" here. His peers, use similar tactics, and then just have their kids monetize it while in office, or realize this value themselves once they leave....

 

And you still fail to indicate how paying more, somewhere else, is of greater benefit to the taxpayer...

 

But thats missing the point. I dont think he's benefiting really at all, but I also dont care if he is, because if he is, its not a material amount and in any event, its peanuts in there big picture, especially against much more pressing issues. Its just more nitpicking from the anti Trumpers...

 

[Read the Footnotes]

the real detail.

 

Its being done at cost. In other words, Trump makes no money.

 

Are you dropping your previous primary argument 'the real detail" and switching to rationalizations?

 

It seems to me that Trump is trying to prove that everyone is crooked and can't be trusted by using himself as an example. He is setting up a false dichotomy of it's either me, or the other guys who are worse. All the evidence points to him actually being much more corrupt. It's incredibly cynical to allow that when there might be other better options.

 

Just as "spend less at Doral or spend more somewhere else" may be a false dichotomy. Who said they have to spend more elsewhere? Do you have evidence?

 

I understand the frustration with other politicians, but choosing to overlook the sins of a politician who is likely setting all time records for political corruption is just inexplicable. Don't forget Trump's first big successes were mired in political/tax corruption. So this corruption goes back four decades. Here's an example just mentioned today in Politico. (https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/10/18/trump-giuliani-ukraine-lawyer-new-york-history-friendship-229857)

 

Plus the timing of this is likely a distraction technique. Trump would rather us argue about the legality of what he might do than the illegality of what he has already admitted to.

 

The real question is what would be a bridge to far for you Trump supporters? Is there anything he could do that would shake your confidence? If he announced he was suspending the constitution tomorrow and appointing himself King to protect us from AOC, would you accept that as reasonable and acceptable? Or would that seem to be selling a false dichotomy to and destroying our system of government?

[Parsad]

So even some arcanely structured argument about a "subsidy" type benefit(dems love those dont they?), still, Im sure, if you care(I dont) enough to then go and quantify it, comes to what? Something that is inarguably a negligible bottom line number....plus, lets not ignore "comps" here. His peers, use similar tactics, and then just have their kids monetize it while in office, or realize this value themselves once they leave....

 

And you still fail to indicate how paying more, somewhere else, is of greater benefit to the taxpayer...

 

But thats missing the point. I dont think he's benefiting really at all, but I also dont care if he is, because if he is, its not a material amount and in any event, its peanuts in there big picture, especially against much more pressing issues. Its just more nitpicking from the anti Trumpers...

 

This is an administration that has lied about every number it has shown or given out...starting with the biggest inaugural attendance of all time!  When they say they are saving taxpayer's money, that may be only on the rooms which they said would be rented out at $50 per night.  They will pad the food, alcohol costs and the sheer amount of notoriety, interest and benefits from networking are priceless. 

 

What a way to showcase your struggling property than to hold one of the most prominent conferences in the world there?  You think the price goes up or down if someone wants to buy after the conference?  Do you think business improves or decreases?  And at the very least, do you think this is at all appropriate when his children not only work within the White House, but also continue to control all facets of the business...and we know he's telling them exactly what to do? 

 

It's incredibly sad when the President of the United States and his family are grifting the U.S. taxpayers while sitting in office with his Cheshire grin!  Cheers!

[RuleNumberOne]

Trump was born rich. He had an income of $200k per year in 1949 when he was 3 years old (which in today's dollar is more than a million dollars per year).

 

If he shows off his properties to some junior world leaders, his voters don't care.

 

That is why Trump has loyal voters - they can see the difference between him and Evasive Elizabeth aka Lying Liz.

[Gregmal]

Like I said, even if he profits, I dont care. And cant help at laugh at all the people who are now "up in arms" over abuses of the system, after largely being oh so quiet about it until Trump took office. This type of stuff has been going on forever, by both this in office, and those who leave but still monetize the legacy. So unless you were vocally complaining about it before Trump, I just take the complaining about Trump, with a grain of salt...

[Gregmal]

the real detail.

 

Its being done at cost. In other words, Trump makes no money.

 

Are you dropping your previous primary argument 'the real detail" and switching to rationalizations?

 

It seems to me that Trump is trying to prove that everyone is crooked and can't be trusted by using himself as an example. He is setting up a false dichotomy of it's either me, or the other guys who are worse. All the evidence points to him actually being much more corrupt. It's incredibly cynical to allow that when there might be other better options.

 

Just as "spend less at Doral or spend more somewhere else" may be a false dichotomy. Who said they have to spend more elsewhere? Do you have evidence?

 

I understand the frustration with other politicians, but choosing to overlook the sins of a politician who is likely setting all time records for political corruption is just inexplicable. Don't forget Trump's first big successes were mired in political/tax corruption. So this corruption goes back four decades. Here's an example just mentioned today in Politico. (https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/10/18/trump-giuliani-ukraine-lawyer-new-york-history-friendship-229857)

 

Plus the timing of this is likely a distraction technique. Trump would rather us argue about the legality of what he might do than the illegality of what he has already admitted to.

 

The real question is what would be a bridge to far for you Trump supporters? Is there anything he could do that would shake your confidence? If he announced he was suspending the constitution tomorrow and appointing himself King to protect us from AOC, would you accept that as reasonable and acceptable? Or would that seem to be selling a false dichotomy to and destroying our system of government?

 

Where did I say that? My comment was that the real detail(whether accurate or not), is that its said to be done at cost...to which you respond with all these speculations about "other ways" they are making money. Which if objective, you know is bullshit because there's not enough definitive detail to make a conclusion either way there, if solely going by verifiable facts... you accuse others of changing the argument, but it is often you who does it. My point...the reporting is leaving out reportable information. And in either event, I dont care if he is or isn't making money....simple enough.

[Read the Footnotes]

Trump was born rich. He had an income of $200k per year in 1949 when he was 3 years old (which in today's dollar is more than a million dollars per year).

 

If he shows off his properties to some junior world leaders, his voters don't care.

 

That is why Trump has loyal voters - they can see the difference between him and Evasive Elizabeth aka Lying Liz.

I am confused. I thought the story was that Trump was self made and that he's worth hundreds of billions of dollars now. I just can't keep this straight. The truth is so much easier to remember.

[Cardboard]

"So unless you were vocally complaining about it before Trump, I just take the complaining about Trump, with a grain of salt..."

 

Yup! Pick and choose complaining. Very similar to hate speech.

[Read the Footnotes]

the real detail.

 

Its being done at cost. In other words, Trump makes no money.

 

Are you dropping your previous primary argument 'the real detail" and switching to rationalizations?

 

It seems to me that Trump is trying to prove that everyone is crooked and can't be trusted by using himself as an example. He is setting up a false dichotomy of it's either me, or the other guys who are worse. All the evidence points to him actually being much more corrupt. It's incredibly cynical to allow that when there might be other better options.

 

Just as "spend less at Doral or spend more somewhere else" may be a false dichotomy. Who said they have to spend more elsewhere? Do you have evidence?

 

I understand the frustration with other politicians, but choosing to overlook the sins of a politician who is likely setting all time records for political corruption is just inexplicable. Don't forget Trump's first big successes were mired in political/tax corruption. So this corruption goes back four decades. Here's an example just mentioned today in Politico. (https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/10/18/trump-giuliani-ukraine-lawyer-new-york-history-friendship-229857)

 

Plus the timing of this is likely a distraction technique. Trump would rather us argue about the legality of what he might do than the illegality of what he has already admitted to.

 

The real question is what would be a bridge to far for you Trump supporters? Is there anything he could do that would shake your confidence? If he announced he was suspending the constitution tomorrow and appointing himself King to protect us from AOC, would you accept that as reasonable and acceptable? Or would that seem to be selling a false dichotomy to and destroying our system of government?

 

Where did I say that? My comment was that the real detail(whether accurate or not), is that its said to be done at cost...to which you respond with all these speculations about "other ways" they are making money. Which if objective, you know is bullshit because there's not enough definitive detail to make a conclusion either way there, if solely going by verifiable facts... you accuse others of changing the argument, but it is often you who does it. My point...the reporting is leaving out reportable information. And in either event, I dont care if he is or isn't making money....simple enough.

Ok. I get what you are saying. You are more focussed on the belief that there is not cash cost to the government? Is that a more important element in your argument?

 

At the same time you did say "Trump makes no money". So it seems you are conceding the point that there is real value in bookings at cost due the fixed cost nature of the business, you just don't care or believe it is immaterial. I think I understand now.

[Gregmal]

"So unless you were vocally complaining about it before Trump, I just take the complaining about Trump, with a grain of salt..."

 

Yup! Pick and choose complaining. Very similar to hate speech.

 

Thats what they do...nitpick the minutae after burying heads in the sand for eternity, with the catalyst simply being someone they dont like is now in office....

 

summarized

 

OMG, he's endorsing his property while president!!

 

me: so you're surprised by politicians exploiting the system?

 

but, but, Trump is using the office for ways that benefit him personally!

 

me: So you are surprised that politicians abuse the system and are likely corrupt?

 

Trump might be breaking the law!!!

 

me: You've never prior been aware that politicians abuse the system and the law all the time and have for centuries? You're either retarded or just hate Trump. Thats the gist.

 

[Parsad]

Like I said, even if he profits, I dont care. And cant help at laugh at all the people who are now "up in arms" over abuses of the system, after largely being oh so quiet about it until Trump took office. This type of stuff has been going on forever, by both this in office, and those who leave but still monetize the legacy. So unless you were vocally complaining about it before Trump, I just take the complaining about Trump, with a grain of salt...

 

But you guys are the ones saying he was there to fix the problems?!  Which is it?  Is he there to fix the problems or grift the system more than any other administration?

 

He can't be there to fix the problems while creating more.  It's like calling the pest control guy to catch your rats, but he's the pied piper, brings in all of his rats and then bills you for it!  The biggest crooks were all in his own administration, including himself and his family.  Cheers!

[Gregmal]

the real detail.

 

Its being done at cost. In other words, Trump makes no money.

 

Are you dropping your previous primary argument 'the real detail" and switching to rationalizations?

 

It seems to me that Trump is trying to prove that everyone is crooked and can't be trusted by using himself as an example. He is setting up a false dichotomy of it's either me, or the other guys who are worse. All the evidence points to him actually being much more corrupt. It's incredibly cynical to allow that when there might be other better options.

 

Just as "spend less at Doral or spend more somewhere else" may be a false dichotomy. Who said they have to spend more elsewhere? Do you have evidence?

 

I understand the frustration with other politicians, but choosing to overlook the sins of a politician who is likely setting all time records for political corruption is just inexplicable. Don't forget Trump's first big successes were mired in political/tax corruption. So this corruption goes back four decades. Here's an example just mentioned today in Politico. (https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/10/18/trump-giuliani-ukraine-lawyer-new-york-history-friendship-229857)

 

Plus the timing of this is likely a distraction technique. Trump would rather us argue about the legality of what he might do than the illegality of what he has already admitted to.

 

The real question is what would be a bridge to far for you Trump supporters? Is there anything he could do that would shake your confidence? If he announced he was suspending the constitution tomorrow and appointing himself King to protect us from AOC, would you accept that as reasonable and acceptable? Or would that seem to be selling a false dichotomy to and destroying our system of government?

 

Where did I say that? My comment was that the real detail(whether accurate or not), is that its said to be done at cost...to which you respond with all these speculations about "other ways" they are making money. Which if objective, you know is bullshit because there's not enough definitive detail to make a conclusion either way there, if solely going by verifiable facts... you accuse others of changing the argument, but it is often you who does it. My point...the reporting is leaving out reportable information. And in either event, I dont care if he is or isn't making money....simple enough.

Ok. I get what you are saying. You are more focussed on the belief that there is not cash cost to the government? Is that a more important element in your argument?

 

At the same time you did say "Trump makes no money". So it seems you are conceding the point that there is real value in bookings at cost due the fixed cost nature of the business, you just don't care or believe it is immaterial. I think I understand now.

 

Sort of. I can argue whether he is or isn't, or whether there are peripheral benefits or not(or even whether those peripheral benefits would matter given he'd have them anyway once he leaves office)...What I'm saying is the outrage to me is irrelevant because the problem is systemic and has been forever and if the only outrage now is disingenuous because its Trump doing it, that solves nothing...

[Read the Footnotes]

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/us/2019/05/15/trumps-doral-resort-is-in-steep-decline-showing-his-business-problems-are-mounting.html

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-prized-doral-resort-is-in-steep-decline-according-to-company-documents-showing-his-business-problems-are-mounting/2019/05/14/03cc701a-6b54-11e9-be3a-33217240a539_story.html

 

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/tourism-cruises/article233997272.html

 

Golfers who quit their memberships at Trump National Doral after the property’s namesake became president were aiming to lose their link to a man they do not support. Turns out they could be waiting for Trump to pay them back for the rest of their lives.

 

In 2017 the Wall Street Journal reported Trump Doral was offering a 20 percent discount on its $50,000 joining fee. Monthly membership dues now exceed $1,000. Golf members get discounts on food and spa services and advanced reserved tee times with no green fees. A round of golf at Trump Doral is available to the public for as low as $75 on the website GolfNow.com.

 

 

[Read the Footnotes]

the real detail.

 

Its being done at cost. In other words, Trump makes no money.

 

Are you dropping your previous primary argument 'the real detail" and switching to rationalizations?

 

It seems to me that Trump is trying to prove that everyone is crooked and can't be trusted by using himself as an example. He is setting up a false dichotomy of it's either me, or the other guys who are worse. All the evidence points to him actually being much more corrupt. It's incredibly cynical to allow that when there might be other better options.

 

Just as "spend less at Doral or spend more somewhere else" may be a false dichotomy. Who said they have to spend more elsewhere? Do you have evidence?

 

I understand the frustration with other politicians, but choosing to overlook the sins of a politician who is likely setting all time records for political corruption is just inexplicable. Don't forget Trump's first big successes were mired in political/tax corruption. So this corruption goes back four decades. Here's an example just mentioned today in Politico. (https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/10/18/trump-giuliani-ukraine-lawyer-new-york-history-friendship-229857)

 

Plus the timing of this is likely a distraction technique. Trump would rather us argue about the legality of what he might do than the illegality of what he has already admitted to.

 

The real question is what would be a bridge to far for you Trump supporters? Is there anything he could do that would shake your confidence? If he announced he was suspending the constitution tomorrow and appointing himself King to protect us from AOC, would you accept that as reasonable and acceptable? Or would that seem to be selling a false dichotomy to and destroying our system of government?

 

Where did I say that? My comment was that the real detail(whether accurate or not), is that its said to be done at cost...to which you respond with all these speculations about "other ways" they are making money. Which if objective, you know is bullshit because there's not enough definitive detail to make a conclusion either way there, if solely going by verifiable facts... you accuse others of changing the argument, but it is often you who does it. My point...the reporting is leaving out reportable information. And in either event, I dont care if he is or isn't making money....simple enough.

Ok. I get what you are saying. You are more focussed on the belief that there is not cash cost to the government? Is that a more important element in your argument?

 

At the same time you did say "Trump makes no money". So it seems you are conceding the point that there is real value in bookings at cost due the fixed cost nature of the business, you just don't care or believe it is immaterial. I think I understand now.

 

Sort of. I can argue whether he is or isn't, or whether there are peripheral benefits or not(or even whether those peripheral benefits would matter given he'd have them anyway once he leaves office)...What I'm saying is the outrage to me is irrelevant because the problem is systemic and has been forever and if the only outrage now is disingenuous because its Trump doing it, that solves nothing...

 

Ok. So as an analyst, who has proven his analytical capabilities on CoB&F (at least on the boards other than the Politics board), do you believe that booking for an extended period of time the entire resort (because they will have exclusive use of Doral and they will not book rooms or facilities elsewhere according to Mulvaney) of a struggling business with high fixed costs has some value to the Trump Organization, and therefore the Trump and his children?

[Gregmal]

the real detail.

 

Its being done at cost. In other words, Trump makes no money.

 

Are you dropping your previous primary argument 'the real detail" and switching to rationalizations?

 

It seems to me that Trump is trying to prove that everyone is crooked and can't be trusted by using himself as an example. He is setting up a false dichotomy of it's either me, or the other guys who are worse. All the evidence points to him actually being much more corrupt. It's incredibly cynical to allow that when there might be other better options.

 

Just as "spend less at Doral or spend more somewhere else" may be a false dichotomy. Who said they have to spend more elsewhere? Do you have evidence?

 

I understand the frustration with other politicians, but choosing to overlook the sins of a politician who is likely setting all time records for political corruption is just inexplicable. Don't forget Trump's first big successes were mired in political/tax corruption. So this corruption goes back four decades. Here's an example just mentioned today in Politico. (https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/10/18/trump-giuliani-ukraine-lawyer-new-york-history-friendship-229857)

 

Plus the timing of this is likely a distraction technique. Trump would rather us argue about the legality of what he might do than the illegality of what he has already admitted to.

 

The real question is what would be a bridge to far for you Trump supporters? Is there anything he could do that would shake your confidence? If he announced he was suspending the constitution tomorrow and appointing himself King to protect us from AOC, would you accept that as reasonable and acceptable? Or would that seem to be selling a false dichotomy to and destroying our system of government?

 

Where did I say that? My comment was that the real detail(whether accurate or not), is that its said to be done at cost...to which you respond with all these speculations about "other ways" they are making money. Which if objective, you know is bullshit because there's not enough definitive detail to make a conclusion either way there, if solely going by verifiable facts... you accuse others of changing the argument, but it is often you who does it. My point...the reporting is leaving out reportable information. And in either event, I dont care if he is or isn't making money....simple enough.

Ok. I get what you are saying. You are more focussed on the belief that there is not cash cost to the government? Is that a more important element in your argument?

 

At the same time you did say "Trump makes no money". So it seems you are conceding the point that there is real value in bookings at cost due the fixed cost nature of the business, you just don't care or believe it is immaterial. I think I understand now.

 

Sort of. I can argue whether he is or isn't, or whether there are peripheral benefits or not(or even whether those peripheral benefits would matter given he'd have them anyway once he leaves office)...What I'm saying is the outrage to me is irrelevant because the problem is systemic and has been forever and if the only outrage now is disingenuous because its Trump doing it, that solves nothing...

 

Ok. So as an analyst, who has proven his analytics capabilities on CoB&F (at least on the boards other than the Politics board), do you believe that booking for an extended period of time the entire resort (because they will have exclusive use of Doral and they will not book rooms or facilities elsewhere according to Mulvaney) of a struggling business with high fixed costs has some value to the Trump Organization, and therefore the Trump and his children?

 

LOL you just dont get it, do you? I. DONT. CARE.

 

And you, are only complaining, because of a not so thinly veiled hatred of Trump.

 

So your case can be valid or invalid and still completely meaningless to me. The larger issue is politicians, which no one seemed to be all that vocal about prior to Trump...so I give no credence to people who only now pretend to be concerned about these issues, when their primary motivating factor isn't the larger issue itself; just a politician they dont like.

[Read the Footnotes]

I checked GolfNow earlier. It looks like a grand total of 18 people are reserved to play on one doral course this afternoon. Another course is doing better before 2 pm, but is wide open after 2. The Blue Monster course has a total of 3 reservations after 2 pm. The fourth course wasn't listed.

 

That's a pretty sad showing for a Friday afternoon.

[Read the Footnotes]

the real detail.

 

Its being done at cost. In other words, Trump makes no money.

 

Are you dropping your previous primary argument 'the real detail" and switching to rationalizations?

 

It seems to me that Trump is trying to prove that everyone is crooked and can't be trusted by using himself as an example. He is setting up a false dichotomy of it's either me, or the other guys who are worse. All the evidence points to him actually being much more corrupt. It's incredibly cynical to allow that when there might be other better options.

 

Just as "spend less at Doral or spend more somewhere else" may be a false dichotomy. Who said they have to spend more elsewhere? Do you have evidence?

 

I understand the frustration with other politicians, but choosing to overlook the sins of a politician who is likely setting all time records for political corruption is just inexplicable. Don't forget Trump's first big successes were mired in political/tax corruption. So this corruption goes back four decades. Here's an example just mentioned today in Politico. (https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/10/18/trump-giuliani-ukraine-lawyer-new-york-history-friendship-229857)

 

Plus the timing of this is likely a distraction technique. Trump would rather us argue about the legality of what he might do than the illegality of what he has already admitted to.

 

The real question is what would be a bridge to far for you Trump supporters? Is there anything he could do that would shake your confidence? If he announced he was suspending the constitution tomorrow and appointing himself King to protect us from AOC, would you accept that as reasonable and acceptable? Or would that seem to be selling a false dichotomy to and destroying our system of government?

 

Where did I say that? My comment was that the real detail(whether accurate or not), is that its said to be done at cost...to which you respond with all these speculations about "other ways" they are making money. Which if objective, you know is bullshit because there's not enough definitive detail to make a conclusion either way there, if solely going by verifiable facts... you accuse others of changing the argument, but it is often you who does it. My point...the reporting is leaving out reportable information. And in either event, I dont care if he is or isn't making money....simple enough.

Ok. I get what you are saying. You are more focussed on the belief that there is not cash cost to the government? Is that a more important element in your argument?

 

At the same time you did say "Trump makes no money". So it seems you are conceding the point that there is real value in bookings at cost due the fixed cost nature of the business, you just don't care or believe it is immaterial. I think I understand now.

 

Sort of. I can argue whether he is or isn't, or whether there are peripheral benefits or not(or even whether those peripheral benefits would matter given he'd have them anyway once he leaves office)...What I'm saying is the outrage to me is irrelevant because the problem is systemic and has been forever and if the only outrage now is disingenuous because its Trump doing it, that solves nothing...

 

Ok. So as an analyst, who has proven his analytics capabilities on CoB&F (at least on the boards other than the Politics board), do you believe that booking for an extended period of time the entire resort (because they will have exclusive use of Doral and they will not book rooms or facilities elsewhere according to Mulvaney) of a struggling business with high fixed costs has some value to the Trump Organization, and therefore the Trump and his children?

 

LOL you just dont get it, do you? I. DONT. CARE.

 

And you, are only complaining, because of a not so thinly veiled hatred of Trump.

 

So your case can be valid or invalid and still completely meaningless to me. The larger issue is politicians, which no one seemed to be all that vocal about prior to Trump...so I give no credence to people who only now pretend to be concerned about these issues, when their primary motivating factor isn't the larger issue itself; just a politician they dont like.

 

Ok, so though you said "I dont think he's benefiting really at all," you have abandoned trying to defend that position and you are just going to say you don't care. So, you don't care if the President of the United States is openly and defiantly breaking the law in this respect and possibly in many other respects.

 

Personally, I would prefer it if our politicians were at a maximum only so corrupt that they could keep it hidden for at least a while, preferably at least until after they are out of office. If they aren't corrupt at all, even better, but if they at least would not flaunt it in our face and try to convince us everyone is corrupt, and normalize criminality, then I would be fine with it, even if that President was Trump.

 

"And you, are only complaining, because of a not so thinly veiled hatred of Trump." Please try to argue your points based on the merits of your arguments rather than making personal attacks. I think we all would benefit from that.

[Gregmal]

Ok dude, you win. You've worn me out.

 

I dont know how you cant see that saying I dont care but that I dont think whatever the benefit is said to be, would be all that material to him(to which there's a 75% chance people then start trying to argue how much he's "really" worth, etc). Those two things are not concretely dependent. I do not care, and off the cuff, I'd say the benefit, if there is one, is immaterial...

 

And that you obviously dislike Trump, which compels most of this stuff. Not a personal attack, just an observation, which isn't exactly going out on a limb...

 

Done here.

[Read the Footnotes]

The G-7 meeting is scheduled for June 10-12, 2020. The average high for these dates in Doral, FL is 89 degrees Fahrenheit and the average low is 76. What is worse than that though is the humidity. As they say down there, it's not the heat, it's the humidity. Here's what Weathersprark.com says about the humidity in June:

 

Humidity

We base the humidity comfort level on the dew point, as it determines whether perspiration will evaporate from the skin, thereby cooling the body. Lower dew points feel drier and higher dew points feel more humid. Unlike temperature, which typically varies significantly between night and day, dew point tends to change more slowly, so while the temperature may drop at night, a muggy day is typically followed by a muggy night.

 

The chance that a given day will be muggy in Doral is increasing during June, rising from 91% to 100% over the course of the month.

 

For reference, on July 16, the muggiest day of the year, there are muggy conditions 100% of the time, while on January 25, the least muggy day of the year, there are muggy conditions 28% of the time.

 

https://weatherspark.com/m/18599/6/Average-Weather-in-June-in-Doral-Florida-United-States#Sections-Humidity

 

Let's not forget that June is also the rainiest month of the year in Doral, FL. It basically rains every day in the off season.

 

June is the height of the off-season in Doral, FL. People with the means to not be in south Florida at that time of year tend to get out. Holding the G-7 meeting June 10-12, 2020 would fill up what would likely be an otherwise empty resort. Given that the hospitality industry has high fixed costs, a very large portion of those marginal revenues would fall to the bottom line of a struggling resort.

 

Ok, so what does Donald Trump think about Doral during the off-season? From his official travel record, he has spent one night at Dural during the off-season during his presidency. He stayed there after a nearby rally. He has traveled to Florida one of other time during the off-season in the last three years, and was for an event which he could not influence the scheduling of. He has made tons of trips to Mar-a-lago during his presidency, strangely none of those were during the off-season.

 

What about the president's golf habits? Well strangely, none of the 40 days of Presidential Florida golf were played during the off-season.

 

So out of the $110,000,000 of tax payer dollars spent on presidential golf, none of it was spent on off-season golf in Florida.

 

https://trumpgolfcount.com

 

I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that Doral in June is the best time and place in the entire world to hold the G-7 meeting, and that it would not enrich Trump and Co. at all.

 

EDIT: On the subject of weather, I forgot to mention that the event will be held during Hurricane season, which is another reason that this property with high fixed costs is likely sitting pretty empty in June.