Donald Trump has told the world that 2016 is the year he should become U.S. president.
“I am officially running for president of the United States. We are going to make our country great again.”
Comments | 20
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
An interesting tidbit about
An interesting tidbit about Trump. He inherited at least $40 million at the lowest guess-timate and perhaps upwards to $200 million. Forbes values his current wealth at $3 billion, other estimates place it as high as $7 billion. HOWEVER. if you take even the lowest figure of $40 million that he inherited in 1999 and calculate it out to current value in today’s money it comes to around $12 billion. Which means that Trump is not the financial genius he claims to be and in fact he has squandered around $9 billion at least and possibly more since inheriting his father’s wealth.
The truth is Donald Trump is not a self-made man and he has not been a wise steward of the enormous wealth that he inherited. He’s basically a snake-oil salesman of the first degree.
Financial math?
I’m no fan of the Donald, but $40 million to $12 billion? In 16 years? If that’s true, then either he or his financial advisor surely is a financial genius!
Financial Genius???? How do you figure that?
He’s not worth $12 billion samsmitty, he’s worth $3 billion.
Financial genius? My point was he basically inherited $12 billion at the lowest estimate.
When he inherited his fortune in 1999 if he had just put it in the bank and left it alone in the bank at the lowest interest rate figure it would now be worth way over $12 billion. Instead it is now worth $3 billion.
Let me repeat this: $40 million in the bank since 1999 would now be worth $12 billion plus the interest if it had just sat in the bank. Even with the crummy interest rates banks are offering these days, way over $12 billion. But let’s say just $12 billion.
And Trump’s wealth is, according to Forbes, $3 million. He has spent and squandered at the lowest around $9 billion dollars, I repeat, 9 frickin billion dollars. All his purported “deals” have been financial disasters. I repeat, the man has lost around $9 billion dollars in bad investments.
Financial genius would not be the description I would use, more like financial nincompoop!
What he counts on as he puffs his chest up and bills himself as “very rich” is that most people won’t get this and will believe his hucksterism’s instead.
math problem
I am not a Trump fan, but I do like math, and in this case I agree with samsmitty. In order for $40 million to turn into $12 billion in 16 years, you need to have a compounded return of a little over 43.8% per year. The formula in the spreadsheet is =40,000,000*(1+yearly interest rate)^16).
To put this into numbers that are a little closer to most of our experience, your way of doing math would say that if we all just put $10,000 in the bank today we will have no problems with anyone’s retirement savings because we would each have $3 million dollars in 16 years. Not gonna happen. Even if we find a way to get a 4% return on that money (not at any bank I know of) we would have $18,730.
In the case of Trump, if he had $40 million and got that 4% return he would have just under $75 million.
Actually my math is
Actually my math is correct
if you read what I wrote.
First of all, Trump does not have $12 billion, his wealth today according to Forbes is $3 million
He had $40 million inherited at the lowest estimate (some say it was as much as $200 mil)
Secondly I used an index that calculates the value in today’s dollars. I might have confused the issue by bringing up the bank. In fact I think I did. Let’s try this another way.
Let’s say he inherits $40 million (minimum) in 1999. Using the index that calculates value in today’s dollars (buying power), if he had instead inherited the money today it would be the equivalent of him inheriting $12 billion.
So if he had invested the $40 million just keeping pace with inflation and increase in buying power and not making any profit at all, he should at minimum have in today’s dollars the equivalent of $12 billion. He only has $3 billion, so he has a total loss in buying power of $9 billion.
$40 million in 1999 is the same as $12 billion today (buying power)
He’s only worth $3 million
Total loss: $9 billion
I used the Federal Reserve
I used the Federal Reserve CPI calculator by the way.
Out of curiosity I took your $10,000 figure
Let’s say you inherited $10,000 in 1999
And invested it in some manner that keep pace only with inflation and buying power increase.
The value using the CPI Federal Reserve rate would be $14,000 in today’s dollars.
Using the same percentage loss in buying power that Trump’s investments have garnered
If you had used Trump as your financial advisor instead of $14,000 you would have $3,500
This is the equivalent percentage of what his investments have done for the amount he inherited
meaning
he’s a financial nincompoop
I was wrong in trying to use the bank as the way to explain how much he has lost. It’s a matter more of investing in a way that just stays level with the buying power of your money as the years go by. But basically however you word it it boils down to Trump being a horrible investor.
a little more math
Using the Federal Reserve calculator when you enter $40 million in 1999 and solve for today’s dollar amount, it shows $57.5 million, which makes sense. In Trump’s case, if he started with that amount 16 years ago, he has definitely outpaced inflation. In fact, in order to have $3 billion today he would have achieved a return of over 31% per year, every year. I never in my wildest dreams expected to ever be defending The Donald, but in this case I gotta say, if these numbers you use are real, he is not such a horrible investor after all. I don’t know of many people who average over 30% return year after year after year.
Back to a more realistic realm of most of our lives, if we got the same return that he got, we could invest just $13,500 today and let it compound for 16 years and we would have over $1 million. Pretty good gig in my book, and retirement would be so much easier for all of us if we could get that…
WOOPS
You are right. All my calculations were off somehow. Whoops! I must have plunked in the wrong numbers when it wouldn’t take the full $40 million. So he has, if he inherited $40 million, made profit. However I’m still suspicious, I know that he has it set up so his name is not connected to many of his businesses. So when they fail they don’t affect his “track record” because the bankruptcies do show up on his personal finances. I still say he’s a nincompoop and still quite possibly a financial nincompoop because I suspect his figures are really phonied up. As for his books and PR where he gives the impression that he’s a self-made man, that’s all phony. His father was the self-made man. If you inherit somewhere between $40 and $200 million and don’t make some sort of profit you’re really a idiot.
So while perhaps he’s not as big a failure as I thought. My apologies for my numerical error forcing you to defend The Donald because I know I sure wouldn’t want to be having to do that.
However let’s also keep in mind that if he inherited $200 million as some say, then that 30% return is more like 6%. However please do double check that, as we’ve seen I can’t be trusted LOL!
extra )
Yes, I did see the extra parenthesis on my formula but couldn’t figure out how to edit it…
Cue the Calliope Music
This only cements the fact that our electoral circus is mostly a freak show, and insures no substantive debate will occur given the media’s propensity for slathering over lowest denominators.
Ego mongering is apparently the sin qua non for candidates seeking the nation’s highest office. It’s only a matter of time until Tom Cruise, Kanye, or A-Rod appear atop a ticket.
De-Nominators
Interesting how literally apt this word is here in all its meanings. Our Media is both divisive, and through their scandal ravenous and personality obsessed coverage, prop-up nominees into knock-down carnival ducks in a pop-gun shooting gallery.
Of course, the candidates themselves do a pretty good job of self-nullification.
What's missing is the parade
The sideshow is always a prequel to what’s under the main tent. It is designed to draw attention, suck up some extra money, and prepare the audience for what’s to come. Good place for pickpockets to work the crowd.
Step right up!
Neil Young will not be
Neil Young will not be attending this parade. After Trump used his song illegally he endorsed Bernie. Wonder how many other singers/ actors/ authors will do the same.
music and messages
Artists often freak out about politicians sung their songs at campaign rallies. There’s no law against it as long as the campaign pays the royalties. It’s like a radio station playing it.
That said, it is always bad judgment for politicians to use songs at rallies by artists who may not support them. Time and time again they make the mistake of using a song, and the artist and all their fans work against them and for an opponent. It rallies opposition.
Politicians also often mistake the title of a song for its meaning. Born In the USA isn’t a very pro-US song. Keep on Rockin’ in the Free World has the line:
“She hates her life, and what she’s done to it”
and
“We got a thousand points of light
For the homeless man
We got a kinder, gentler,
Machine gun hand”
Yay! Vote Trump!
Rick Perry did it right (am I actually typing this sentence?), by getting a supportive band to rewrite lyrics for him.
Well, that's the thing. Why
Well, that’s the thing. Why pick a song that is not only anti “American”( read conservative) written by a songwriter who abhors everything you stand for. Listen to the freaking lyrics before you use it to announce your run for president. Although I was equally appalled at hearing Hilary desecrate the lyrics to the Beatles “Yesterday”. How about everybody just uses an original song written just for them?
Interesting comments.
First of all Rosa using the Federal Reserve calculator is rather funny. That’d be like a loan shark saying they belong to FDIC. The federal reserve has done more to devalue our currency and made everyone a poor investor.
Then I get a kick out of the “get money out of politics” crew debating this presidential candidates net worth.
Well Mike the point is his
Well Mike the point is his truthfulness and whether he’s a trustworthy guy. The reason Trump’s net worth is interesting regardless of whether he is running for office or not is that he has made a career out of touting himself as a self-made man, someone who knows how to “make a deal.” when in fact he inherited what by any standard would be a huge fortune. He’s also used every trick in the book to hide his “bad deals” and bankruptcies, skirting personal responsibility because it would interfere with his PR image. That’s pertinent not your take on the Fed Reserve.
http://www.alternet.org/story/156234/exposing_how_donald_trump_really_made_his_fortune%3A_inheritance_from_dad_and_the_government's_protection_mostly_did_the_trick
Trump was born in New York City in 1946, the son of real estate tycoon Fred Trump. Fred Trump’s business success not only provided Donald Trump with a posh youth of private schools and economic security but eventually blessed him with an inheritance worth an estimated $40 million to $200 million. It is critical to note, however, that his father’s success, which granted Donald Trump such a great advantage, was enabled and buffered by governmental financing programs. In 1934, while struggling during the Great Depression, financing from the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) allowed Fred Trump to revive his business and begin building a multitude of homes in Brooklyn, selling at $6,000 apiece. Furthermore, throughout World War II, Fred Trump constructed FHA-backed housing for US naval personnel near major shipyards along the East Coast.
Trump eventually found himself in serious financial trouble. In 1990, due to excessive leveraging, The Trump Organization revealed that it was $5 billion in debt ($8.8 billion by some estimates), with $1 billion personally guaranteed by Trump himself. The survival of the company was made possible only by a bailout pact agreed upon in August of that same year by some 70 banks, allowing Trump to defer on nearly $1 billion in debt, as well as to take out second and third mortgages on almost all of his properties. If it were not for the collective effort of all banks and parties involved in that 1990 deal, Trump’s business would have gone bankrupt and failed.
Despite the clear societal and governmental assistance described above, Trump continues to be outspoken in his criticism of government. In his book The America We Deserve, Trump explains that “the greatest threat to the American Dream is the idea that dreamers need close government scrutiny and control. Job one for us is to make sure the public sector does a limited job, and no more.” This quote proves to be particularly ironic when considering Trump’s feelings about eminent domain law…..
From the moment of his birth, Trump was set up for success. The large inheritance left to him by his father, coupled with the contributions and the protections of society and the US government made his ascension to the Forbes 400 list almost inevitable. Nevertheless, Trump fails to recognize this phenomenon and continues to express his belief that he did it alone.
Donald Trump
When you are doing all this cyphering, don’t forget to add the government assistance he got when he was buying property in NYC when he was starting out. Yes, I know that is shocking to hear as he is a Republican. Even the great Donald isn’t above getting a hand out. God forbid a poor person does the same thing.
well, well
The cheese stands alone.
[update: and there’s Kasich…]
There was an announcement today
Trump pants?
Trumpets?
Tuppence?
Trumpence!
Possible definition:
Trumpence: v. adding two when one is enough. Typically used to refer to fruits or nuts, as in “That recipe calls for one pineapple, but I prefer a trumpence.”