quote:

By the way I don't look Indian either.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

FR

People who do not understand business can say whatever they want, but it means nothing.

You don't seem to get it. Like the government spending $600 for a toilet seat, that give money to their friends, and then when they retire they get taken care of by those friends. Well, in some cases it takes to lose money to make money. It is all in to whom you lose said money.

Bankruptcy is a tool. During one of the Bush regimes they made it alot harder to use but it still can be used. Ever hear of a tax shelter ?

And you elected GW Bush who could not run a lemonade stand. But that doesn't matter because the fucking liberals made that illegal anyway.

T^T

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cinnamongirl67

No more bankruptcy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

FR

People who do not understand business can say whatever they want, but it means nothing.

You don't seem to get it. Like the government spending $600 for a toilet seat, that give money to their friends, and then when they retire they get taken care of by those friends. Well, in some cases it takes to lose money to make money. It is all in to whom you lose said money.

Bankruptcy is a tool. During one of the Bush regimes they made it alot harder to use but it still can be used. Ever hear of a tax shelter ?

And you elected GW Bush who could not run a lemonade stand. But that doesn't matter because the fucking liberals made that illegal anyway.

T^T

Once again, you are wrong. GWB and his vertically integrated repub house and senate, (2005) made it more difficult for individuals to obtain bankruptcy. The new laws centered on the reduction in a courts ability to eliminate consumer (credit card et al) and other debt.

The measure would require people with incomes above a certain level to pay some or all of their credit-card charges, medical bills and other obligations under a court-ordered bankruptcy plan.

Those who fought the bill’s passage said the change will fall especially hard on low-income working people, single mothers, minorities and the elderly and will remove a safety net for those who have lost their jobs or face crushing medical bills.

HERE

There were no changes to business bankruptcies which of course it being in the mult-billion$...is for more costly to the cost of lending than individuals obtaining bankruptcy

The $600 toilet seats (and $500 hammers) were built for the Pentagon our champion money-waister...to 'mil specs' (military specifications) and upon requirements that makes all things not bought in the 'open market' just that more expensive and on almost always under what's called cost-plus contracts, meaning the more it costs...the more profit they make. You know that the US Pentagon is the biggest money hole in the world.

Show me where liberals made lemonade stands illegal. Much more likely the great 'free market' repubs were paid to prevent the competition acting in the interest of their plutocratic sponsors.

Furthermore, tax shelters have nothing to do with bankruptcy and your post has almost nothing to do with Trump's business history and any reference to 'his' bankruptcies.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

FR

People who do not understand business can say whatever they want, but it means nothing.

You don't seem to get it. Like the government spending $600 for a toilet seat, that give money to their friends, and then when they retire they get taken care of by those friends. Well, in some cases it takes to lose money to make money. It is all in to whom you lose said money.

Bankruptcy is a tool. During one of the Bush regimes they made it alot harder to use but it still can be used. Ever hear of a tax shelter ?

And you elected GW Bush who could not run a lemonade stand. But that doesn't matter because the fucking liberals made that illegal anyway.

T^T

Once again, you are wrong. GWB and his vertically integrated repub house and senate, (2005) made it more difficult for individuals to obtain bankruptcy. The new laws centered on the reduction in a courts ability to eliminate consumer (credit card et al) and other debt.

The measure would require people with incomes above a certain level to pay some or all of their credit-card charges, medical bills and other obligations under a court-ordered bankruptcy plan.

Those who fought the bill’s passage said the change will fall especially hard on low-income working people, single mothers, minorities and the elderly and will remove a safety net for those who have lost their jobs or face crushing medical bills.

HERE

There were no changes to business bankruptcies which of course it being in the mult-billion$...is for more costly to the cost of lending than individuals obtaining bankruptcy

The $600 toilet seats (and $500 hammers) were built for the Pentagon our champion money-waister...to 'mil specs' (military specifications) and upon requirements that makes all things not bought in the 'open market' just that more expensive and on almost always under what's called cost-plus contracts, meaning the more it costs...the more profit they make. You know that the US Pentagon is the biggest money hole in the world.

Show me where liberals made lemonade stands illegal. Much more likely the great 'free market' repubs were paid to prevent the competition acting in the interest of their plutocratic sponsors.

Furthermore, tax shelters have nothing to do with bankruptcy and your post has almost nothing to do with Trump's business history and any reference to 'his' bankruptcies.

quote:

ORIGINAL: epiphiny43

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

FR

People who do not understand business can say whatever they want, but it means nothing.

You don't seem to get it. Like the government spending $600 for a toilet seat, that give money to their friends, and then when they retire they get taken care of by those friends. Well, in some cases it takes to lose money to make money. It is all in to whom you lose said money.

Bankruptcy is a tool. During one of the Bush regimes they made it alot harder to use but it still can be used. Ever hear of a tax shelter ?

And you elected GW Bush who could not run a lemonade stand. But that doesn't matter because the fucking liberals made that illegal anyway.

T^T

Once again, you are wrong. GWB and his vertically integrated repub house and senate, (2005) made it more difficult for individuals to obtain bankruptcy. The new laws centered on the reduction in a courts ability to eliminate consumer (credit card et al) and other debt.

The measure would require people with incomes above a certain level to pay some or all of their credit-card charges, medical bills and other obligations under a court-ordered bankruptcy plan.

Those who fought the bill’s passage said the change will fall especially hard on low-income working people, single mothers, minorities and the elderly and will remove a safety net for those who have lost their jobs or face crushing medical bills.

HERE

There were no changes to business bankruptcies which of course it being in the mult-billion$...is for more costly to the cost of lending than individuals obtaining bankruptcy

The $600 toilet seats (and $500 hammers) were built for the Pentagon our champion money-waister...to 'mil specs' (military specifications) and upon requirements that makes all things not bought in the 'open market' just that more expensive and on almost always under what's called cost-plus contracts, meaning the more it costs...the more profit they make. You know that the US Pentagon is the biggest money hole in the world.

Show me where liberals made lemonade stands illegal. Much more likely the great 'free market' repubs were paid to prevent the competition acting in the interest of their plutocratic sponsors.

Furthermore, tax shelters have nothing to do with bankruptcy and your post has almost nothing to do with Trump's business history and any reference to 'his' bankruptcies.

Mr. Rodgers, I expect so much more of you, being actually sentient and informed. The "$500 Hammers" were single item titles on lists of tools and charges, this was well documented. NO hammer ever was charged at 1000% of it's cost. The "$600 (Actually $800, IIRC) Toilet Seats were airline industry standard integrated molded fiberglass seats and covers for airline toilet modules, including sink, toilet seat, toilet surround, waste tank cover, etc., and the US was charged exactly in line with what very careful pencil sharpening accountants were seeing on competitive contracts pitting Boeing against AirBus from every airline extant. That US legislators couldn't tell the difference even when this was all pointed out to them says more about who runs for public office than the materials acquisition practices of the DOD.
Cost plus contracts are the Only way most development items can find bidders. There are 4 types of Cost Plus contracts: Cost Plus fixed fee; Cost plus Incentive Fee; Cost plus Award Fee: and Cost Plus percentage of cost. According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost-plus_contract) this last is actually forbidden under Federal Regulation (FAR Part 16.102). Another Right Wing anti-govt conspiracy theory shot all to hell with a couple of minutes on the web?
As specifications morph and change as the technology is actually discovered and developed as an integral part of the process, no realistic fixed price bid could ever satisfy company accountants adverse to losing the whole company to a fatally low bid. A few projects get downgraded during development. A lot are abandoned as research shows the goals unrealistic or the technology too immature to produce effective weapons or projects. Or cost turns out to be exorbitant for likely results or missions. Far more get progressively more complex as weapon systems or project goals and missions are either advanced or clarified. In contrast to the general incredibly uninformed cynicism, a few years reading trade journalism of the Defense Industry such as Aviation Week, shows the process has a number of political oars stirring the waters (Legislators often far more concerned with Where things will be built, than What, seeking major contracts for their area.), but generally quite professional and acute business and technical people (On both sides) in a most competitive process working very closely with the military experts to obtain actually useful hardware and weapons. And with both human nature and all known governments being somewhat imperfect, there are constant SNAFUs to keep the newspapers happy slandering everyone with superficial and agenda laden coverage. It's too much work to dig out Why a 'toilet seat' would be billed at $800 on public documents any journalist can obtain. And too easy to bad mouth everyone involved with the assumption what the reporters imagine is a 'toilet seat' is actually the part being billed for.

For the latest on one of the Donald's bigger FAILs: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36972005 Trump Taj Mahal is now closing completely, Mr. Icahn listing losses at $100 Million. And 3000 more jobs lost.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DominantWrestler

Epiphany, you have a link for the line item claim for the hammer?

quote:

ORIGINAL: epiphiny43
For the latest on one of the Donald's bigger FAILs: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36972005 Trump Taj Mahal is now closing completely, Mr. Icahn listing losses at $100 Million. And 3000 more jobs lost.