Are Donald Trump's multiple bankruptcies a legitimate issue?

[reinoe]

The President can affect.many things, and Trump claims to be able to affect the economy as President. As such, it is relevant.

lol ok. Your dodge is noted.

 

[Ikari]

If people could see the future there would be less problems in the world, but that does not exist.

You are under the impression that a business owner wants his business to fail or does whatever he can to make it fail.

That is not the case.

Nobody wants to declare bankruptcy.

It is like a colonoscopy without the love.

Such imagination.

I'm under no such illusion, I think business owners want their businesses to succeed, which is why these bankruptcies are even more damning to the boastful claims of Trump. It means he failed.

And in business, it happens. But Trump has a pattern of bankruptcies, it's not a one off but a trend. So he's talking about the economy and our debt, but he himself has this storied history of failed businesses. We.don't need a King of Debt right now.

So this will be an issue that comes up a lot, most due to the way that Trump portrays himself. And this will end up being an important facet of this election.

 

[upsideguy]

Hillary advocates that we take action in Syria by arming and training terrorists. There is no legal basis for this action. Trump's bankruptcies are legal.

Many people who abuse SNAP are engaging in criminal acts and the government doesn't have the resources to prosecute. Did Trump abuse bankruptcy in any criminal way?

I am completely lost by the analogy. Trump's bankruptcies are a part of his record, worthy of scrutiny. Hillary's positions on things are a part of her platform, worthy of scrutiny. The scrutiny of one does not preclude, nor should satisfy, the scrutiny of another.

There is nothing in the original proposition that refers to Hillary or snap, so where do these distractions come from. (let me point on the obfuscation is often used in debate when the debater is ill-prepared to talk about the topic at hand). I am not sure why we can not conduct intelligent debate on the issue at hand without having to take off-ramps on the road of coherency.

 

[Ikari]

I am completely lost by the analogy. Trump's bankruptcies are a part of his record, worthy of scrutiny. Hillary's positions on things are a part of her platform, worthy of scrutiny. The scrutiny of one does not preclude, nor should satisfy, the scrutiny of another.

I am not sure why we can not conduct intelligent debate on the issue at hand without having to take off-ramps on the road of coherency.

Because Trumos bankruptcies are a real black eye and his supporters do not want them mentioned. So it's deflection city when it comes to that.

 

[Mason66]

Such imagination.

I'm under no such illusion, I think business owners want their businesses to succeed, which is why these bankruptcies are even more damning to the boastful claims of Trump. It means he failed.

And in business, it happens. But Trump has a pattern of bankruptcies, it's not a one off but a trend. So he's talking about the economy and our debt, but he himself has this storied history of failed businesses. We.don't need a King of Debt right now.

So this will be an issue that comes up a lot, most due to the way that Trump portrays himself. And this will end up being an important facet of this election.

.008% is not a trend, even if you think it is.

 

[reinoe]

I am completely lost by the analogy. Trump's bankruptcies are a part of his record, worthy of scrutiny. Hillary's positions on things are a part of her platform, worthy of scrutiny. The scrutiny of one does not preclude, nor should satisfy, the scrutiny of another.

I am not sure why we can not conduct intelligent debate on the issue at hand without having to take off-ramps on the road of coherency.

Trump advocates a legal action. His opponent advocates an illegal action. Since the media has already been shown time and time again to be in her tank it's up to the people to point out the error of her ways.

 

[reinoe]

Because Trumos bankruptcies are a real black eye and his supporters do not want them mentioned. So it's deflection city when it comes to that.

The Trump affiliated businesses going bankrupt are not a black eye but media spin is trying to make it seem that way.

 

[upsideguy]

Trump advocates a legal action. His opponent advocates an illegal action. Since the media has already been shown time and time again to be in her tank it's up to the people to point out the error of her ways.

The issue at hand is whether the bankruptcies are a legitimate issue in the election, not whether they are the only legitimate issue. You are not answering the question on hand, you are trying to hijack it.

 

[reinoe]

The issue at hand is whether the bankruptcies are a legitimate issue in the election, not whether they are the only legitimate issue. You are not answering the question on hand, you are trying to hijack it.

See post 157. There is no effort to hijack anything. There is an effort to point out that this is all media generated nonsense.

 

[Ikari]

The Trump affiliated businesses going bankrupt are not a black eye but media spin is trying to make it seem that way.

Someone claiming such business expertise and trying to coach the US in terms of its debts should have the credentials to back it up. Someone overseeing some vast organization needs the skills to keep it going. Trump's bankruptcies play into this. A government is way more complex a being than large business. Histories of bankruptcies can be disconcerting, particularly forms candidate running on their business savy and claiming that they can fix America's financial woes.

Like it or not, due to the way Trump built his public persona, his bankruptcies are a big deal.

 

[reinoe]

Someone claiming such business expertise and trying to coach the US in terms of its debts should have the credentials to back it up. Someone overseeing some vast organization needs the skills to keep it going. Trump's bankruptcies play into this. A government is way more complex a being than large business. Histories of bankruptcies can be disconcerting, particularly forms candidate running on their business savy and claiming that they can fix America's financial woes.

Like it or not, due to the way Trump built his public persona, his bankruptcies are a big deal.

It is business savvy to file for bankruptcy. Did you know that all of Atlantic City started going under? Trump was not in some unique situation in at least 2 of those bankruptcies. So right off the bat half of his bankruptcies were out of his control regardless of how well they were run. You see how this story about bankruptcy is nonsense? Of course the people making the most hay about it are people who don't know anything about business which is why the unemployed and journalists are trying to make a big deal about this.

 

[Eric7216]

Wasn't aware of any Donald Trump bankruptcies. He has stated that he has been involved with some businesses that went into bankruptcy but that is different from personal bankruptcies. One is simply operating in the legal sphere of business while the other may represent personal issues.

The World Bank ranks the US 7th in the world in terms of ease of doing business. Unfortunately, we rank that high due to ranking 2nd in ease of credit and 5th in resolving insolvency. Democrats tend to love these things. Unfortunately, in all of the other subcategories of ease of doing business, the US ranks much lower-too many regulations and very hard to start a business.
Ranking of economies - Doing Business - World Bank Group

I would suspect that many Democrats would understand that the ease of getting credit and insolvency is a good thing and not mind it while many Republicans would like more regulations on the ease of bankruptcies. People should be responsible for their own actions.

 

[Mason66]

Someone claiming such business expertise and trying to coach the US in terms of its debts should have the credentials to back it up. Someone overseeing some vast organization needs the skills to keep it going. Trump's bankruptcies play into this. A government is way more complex a being than large business. Histories of bankruptcies can be disconcerting, particularly forms candidate running on their business savy and claiming that they can fix America's financial woes.

Like it or not, due to the way Trump built his public persona, his bankruptcies are a big deal.

Does it make a difference to you that the bankruptcies were chapter 11 to re-organize and not chapter 7 to liquidate?

Any difference at all?

 

[Manc Skipper]

Wasn't aware of any Donald Trump bankruptcies. He has stated that he has been involved with some businesses that went into bankruptcy but that is different from personal bankruptcies. One is simply operating in the legal sphere of business while the other may represent personal issues.

The World Bank ranks the US 7th in the world in terms of ease of doing business. Unfortunately, we rank that high due to ranking 2nd in ease of credit and 5th in resolving insolvency. Democrats tend to love these things. Unfortunately, in all of the other subcategories of ease of doing business, the US ranks much lower-too many regulations and very hard to start a business.
Ranking of economies - Doing Business - World Bank Group

I would suspect that many Democrats would understand that the ease of getting credit and insolvency is a good thing and not mind it while many Republicans would like more regulations on the ease of bankruptcies. People should be responsible for their own actions.

There's a story from his daughter referring to Trump pointing to a homeless guy begging on the sidewalk as they drove by, and saying: "That guy is $8 billion richer than I am right now!"

 

[VanceMack]

Absolutely, if they were against the law and not in accordance with established business practices utilized by liberals and conservatives alike.

 

[Objective Voice]

Are Donald Trump's multiple bankruptcies (BK) a legitimate issue?

For his campaign and/or qualifications for public office.

I say no (though I did vote 'minor issue'). Certainly BK is not ideal, and it is generally avoided, but in today's world BK is as much a conscious business strategy as anything else. It's how you come out on the other end that matters, and Trump always seems to come out well at the other end. If anything, that might be indicative of his ability to "work the system" in order to succeed.

Doesn't mean I'm warming to trump, of course. I still believe he'd be a travesty overall. I just don't think this specific complaint is valid.

Depends...

Were his bankruptcies total liquidation (chapter 7) or debt restructuring (Chapter 11)?

If Donald Trump's bankruptcies were under Chapter 7, then they should trouble anyone who supports him on the basis of his business acumen, as a "job creator". For if nearly every business venture you've tried has failed due to insolvency, then you're not a very good job creator are you?

If, on the other hand, his bankruptcies were under Chapter 11, then I think most people could give him a pass presuming that his business(es) as reorganized are thriving.

As an aside, I think what should troubles the voters more isn't his bankruptcies of the past, but rather knowing whether or not any of his existing business ventures have grown and, if so, how many people he's employed over the years in those businesses. Growth being the key word here. If his employment number have remained constant, then it would indicate that his business(es) aren't growing and that would nullify his claim of being a "job creator" of the caliber that his supporters are seeking from him.

 

[katzgar]

Are Donald Trump's multiple bankruptcies (BK) a legitimate issue?

For his campaign and/or qualifications for public office.

I say no (though I did vote 'minor issue'). Certainly BK is not ideal, and it is generally avoided, but in today's world BK is as much a conscious business strategy as anything else. It's how you come out on the other end that matters, and Trump always seems to come out well at the other end. If anything, that might be indicative of his ability to "work the system" in order to succeed.

Doesn't mean I'm warming to trump, of course. I still believe he'd be a travesty overall. I just don't think this specific complaint is valid.

yes, means his word is no good.

 

[reinoe]

Depends...

Were his bankruptcies total liquidation (chapter 7) or debt restructuring (Chapter 11)?

If Donald Trump's bankruptcies were under Chapter 7, then they should trouble anyone who supports him on the basis of his business acumen, as a "job creator". For if nearly every business venture you've tried has failed due to insolvency, then you're not a very good job creator are you?

If, on the other hand, his bankruptcies were under Chapter 11, then I think most people could give him a pass presuming that his business(es) as reorganized are thriving.

As an aside, I think what should troubles the voters more isn't his bankruptcies of the past, but rather knowing whether or not any of his existing business ventures have grown and, if so, how many people he's employed over the years in those businesses. Growth being the key word here. If his employment number have remained constant, then it would indicate that his business(es) aren't growing and that would nullify his claim of being a "job creator" of the caliber that his supporters are seeking from him.

Yes, these were chapter 11 bankruptcies and not chapter 7. The media never mentions that either. Furthermore they never mention that these businesses are all continuing and they rarely mention that all of Atlantic City floundered, not just Trump's businesses. That's why I keep mentioning that it's people who don't know about business who are whining about this and it's the liberal media fanning the flames. This is a non-story.

 

[Objective Voice]

Yes, these were chapter 11 bankruptcies and not chapter 7. The media never mentions that either. Furthermore they never mention that these businesses are all continuing and they rarely mention that all of Atlantic City floundered, not just Trump's businesses. That's why I keep mentioning that it's people who don't know about business who are whining about this and it's the liberal media fanning the flames. This is a non-story.

The bankruptcies themselves should be a non-story at this point since they happened so long ago and were for reorganizing. However, that don't trouble me as much as his pretentious claims of "owning" merchandise that isn't his (i.e., Trump Wine or Trump Steaks). But of even more concern to me would be his business growth and his employee numbers. What are the numbers there? How does his employees (past and present) view him as a business owner/boss?

As someone claiming to be a job creator, I'd really like to know what he's done on a national level to foster job growth. As I see it, his hotels, golf courses and casinos are only regional ventures at best catering to specific market segments. Has Donald Trump ever created a national franchise? Marketing a wholesale product for resell is noble, but unless he's a quiet Jeff Bezos, I don't think Donald Trump has much ground to stand on as a bona fide job creator.

 

[Mason66]

Depends...

Were his bankruptcies total liquidation (chapter 7) or debt restructuring (Chapter 11)?

If Donald Trump's bankruptcies were under Chapter 7, then they should trouble anyone who supports him on the basis of his business acumen, as a "job creator". For if nearly every business venture you've tried has failed due to insolvency, then you're not a very good job creator are you?

If, on the other hand, his bankruptcies were under Chapter 11, then I think most people could give him a pass presuming that his business(es) as reorganized are thriving.

As an aside, I think what should troubles the voters more isn't his bankruptcies of the past, but rather knowing whether or not any of his existing business ventures have grown and, if so, how many people he's employed over the years in those businesses. Growth being the key word here. If his employment number have remained constant, then it would indicate that his business(es) aren't growing and that would nullify his claim of being a "job creator" of the caliber that his supporters are seeking from him.

Do you discount the jobs created when he opens a new business?

 

[Thrilla]

they are a very small issue...and very very easy for him to answer to.

it's not a very good attack angle to take.

 

[Roger1]

Isn't it amazing how nosy people can get when they're probing into SOMEONE ELSE'S life.
So tell us Model American, how many skeletons are you hiding in your closet?

 

[Multicam]

No, it's not an issue at all. Trump has made tons of business ventures. If you add up his bankruptcies and then compare them to all of his business ventures, the bankruptcies prove to be rather few. I don't see a problem with someone who turned $1 million (or $100 million) into several billion. Every time you do something that requires critical thinking, planning, and devotion, you will make a few mistakes along the way. To err is human, folks. None of us are perfect, not even presidential candidates.

 

[justabubba]

No, it's not an issue at all. Trump has made tons of business ventures. If you add up his bankruptcies and then compare them to all of his business ventures, the bankruptcies prove to be rather few. I don't see a problem with someone who turned $1 million (or $100 million) into several billion. Every time you do something that requires critical thinking, planning, and devotion, you will make a few mistakes along the way. To err is human, folks. None of us are perfect, not even presidential candidates.

so, your position is a rich person should be entitled to dump his bad investment decisions upon those who entrusted him with their money
apparently, trust plays no part in your evaluation of a presidential candidate
nor does ethical behavior

it is true, we elect the politicians we deserve

 

[Objective Voice]

Do you discount the jobs created when he opens a new business?

No. Why would I?