By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
irstupid said:
Machiavellian said:

Why the hell would yo want a gambler making decisions on the economy.  Think about this for a sec. It's one thing to gamble and if you lose you just file bankruptcy and since you did not use your own money, its not touch, you move on to the next gamble.  Its another to gamble with everyone else livelily hood then if it goes south well, it did not touch your finance, oh well lets try something else. 

Being a Billion or millionaire does not mean he has any insight into how to run macro economics since he has no experience.  If we are to go by the people who left his administration that was giving him advise on macroeconomics, its been stated that he doesn't listen and does not like to take advise.  As he stated he like to do things from the gut.  Why would I want someone who has failed as many times as Trump to be working from his gut if he will not take the time to actually research.

I think you have a misconception about the gambling. This isn't like they are dropping everything on red willy nilly. Their is a lot of thinking and research involved.

But if you go and look at many of the wealthiest and successful people in the world and most all of them have lost big at one time or another due to a venture going bad of some sort.

You say you don't want a billion/millionaire running our economy or government. I say the same damn thing in regards to most politicians who have never had a real job their entire life. Do you really trust these politicians who are somehow millionaires who have never worked a normal job their entire life. They have only ever been a politician. Yet here they are telling me that this or that is not good for me. You have politicians who have bene in office for like 30+ years. They are starting dynasties where when they retire their sons or daughters take their place. Politicians have basically become like a new royalty or mafia. Even the top is ridiculous. You had the Bushes and Clintons. Husband and wife almost presidents. Daughter supposedly taking her moms spot in new York or something I hear. Bushes you have father and son president, and other son was favored for some time to become next chance. I mean how many people expected a Bush vs. Clinton election to happen in 2016.

 I'll take my chances with an Elon Musk, Mark Cuban, Donald Trump or someone who has run multiple businesses in their life, good or bad.

Personally I would really love someone like Mike Rowe. Someone who truly does hang with the common man and has done hundreds of jobs that the everday American does. But no, we will be forever stuck with people who's entire life experiences in the world are from a textbook in their school classes. Never a blister in their life from work, and deeply indebted to the system/state/ect for help on getting elected.

I have no misconception about the gambling.  I understand full well, when you gamble with other people money you can be as risky as you can because if you are wrong, the only thing you effect is that business.  If you read about the Bankruptcies that Trump went through most of them were part of mismanagement which as the head of those businesses he is responsible for.  With each of his properties that went belly up, they bleed money,  he mismanaged funds all the while he  drew a fact check until he had to file Chapter 11 and give up that business to his creditors.  Its one thing to do it maybe twice and learned from those situations but 5 times, come on.  Why would this instill any kind of confidence in Trump ability to manage when he continued to do the same trick over and over again.  Also it would be different if he came from modest funds or even the bottom and built a empire, but inheriting daddy money and pretty much Fing it up doesn't make you confident on his management abilities.

One of the big problems and we see this every day with Trump is that the economy is not like a business.  The forces that effect macroeconomics are totally different and they do not always translate the same in both spaces.  Case in point would be when Trump kept talking about killing NAFTA without fully understanding the businesses that are affected by this trade agreement.  Not only did he not understand, but he didn't understand how his very words and tweets caused insecurity in the market causing buyers to start seeking other sellers instead of the US.  These are long standing contracts that once gone probably will never come back but he wouldn't shut up until people got together and explained to him like a child the turmoil he was causing.  Next he goes into meetings without full knowledge.  One example he kept telling the Canadian prime minister that we had a trade deficit with them all the while the Canadian Prime minister kept telling him he was wrong.  Somebody again had to sit him down and explained the situation which was his job in the first place to understand before going into meetings and talks trying to renegotiate looking ignorant.  There are way to many examples where Trump goes into meetings and conversations with world leaders unprepared, then he open his mouth and everyone knows he has no clue what he is talking about until someone has to lecture him like he is a child.

Elon Musk and Mark Cuban I probably can get behind but Trump was never a person I would put into that list. Just like a doctor, I want the top student not the C student and so far there isn't anything Trump has shone me that elevate him above a C.