Wanna supply some evidence? What exactly did she gain? I can show you the tax forms from the Donald J. Trump Foundation, which by law are required to be made available to the public.
BTW, the whole "political gain" thing is a bit of a red herring considering Trump never held elective office of any kind before becoming President, don't you think? He certainly used his foundation as his own personal piggy bank, something the Clintons never did.
> I can > show you the tax forms from the Donald J. Trump Foundation, > which by law are required to be made available to the public.
Donald Trump is a private citizen. He is also a successful businessman who DID NOT make his money from political gain.
> BTW, the whole "political gain" thing is a bit of a red herring > considering Trump never held elective office of any kind before > becoming President, don't you think?
LOLOLOL! So, it's a red herring because he didn't make his money fleecing the American taxpayer like Hillary?
> He certainly used his > foundation as his own personal piggy bank, something the > Clintons never did.
Once again, look at the Clintons' net worth. Though, You will have to open your eyes to do it.
And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.
I'll ignore the fact that the report...See MoreIn one of the latest incidents of a democrat throwing stones while living in a glass house, Nancy Pelosi was asked, "you've been in congress a little bit, and you're in leadership. Have you ever met the Russian ambassador?"
Her answer? "Not with this Russian ambassador, no."
I'll ignore the fact that the reporter should have pushed her to answer the question (she answered her own question). Unfortunately, pictures do not lie, unlike Pelosi. Pictures have surfaced of him across the table from her.
And here I thought Iowa was in trouble since the Republicans took over. Yet, in Iowa, all the Republicans want is a freeze on hiring Democrats as college professors until their numbers are near equal. See the article, “Iowa Bill Would Force Universities to Hire Right-Wing Professors.”
I post this, and will be waiting for conservatives to defend this! Their party is insane!
Yet in this day and age, all we hear about is how not enough people of color are hired for this job or that job. I am all for hiring the best person for the job regardless of identified race, identified gender, or identified ideology. If we can get any politician (Republican, Democrat, or Bernie) to agree to that and get rid of all preferences in hiring, let me know, and I'll support them.
As I said, it inflames racism! The example I use is scholarships for college. There should be no scholarships for any subgroup – other than poor people. Then in giving scholarships to the poor, minorities must get their share - we know what happened with the GI Bill after WWII. However, no one is left out, and the scholarships in North Dakota go almost exclusively to whites – for obvious reasons.
The Obama administration funneled billions of dollars to activist organizations through a Department of Justice slush fund scheme, according to congressional investigators.
With maybe 14 percent of the American workforce in a pu...See MoreAccording to a survey of 500 current college students conducted by LendEDU, a private firm that connects students and their families with student loans and loan refinancing, 49.8 percent believe they would be able to receive federal forgiveness on their student loans after graduation.
With maybe 14 percent of the American workforce in a public service job, the actual numbers of those who may qualify for student loan forgiveness or discharge is maybe below 10 percent.
long-time lurkerOn 3/02/17, Cha Cha wrote: > On 3/01/17, long-time lurker wrote: >> Most students take out student loans before they receive a >> college education. The US has a poor history of teaching >> consumer education and finances over several generations. >> It's not that these students failed the final. They never >> took ...See MoreOn 3/02/17, Cha Cha wrote: > On 3/01/17, long-time lurker wrote: >> Most students take out student loans before they receive a >> college education. The US has a poor history of teaching >> consumer education and finances over several generations. >> It's not that these students failed the final. They never >> took the class. >> >> -ltl > > Oh, come on, I learned "consumer education" beginning around > age five. I never studied it formally but I did have lots of > elementary school math. My parents taught me to give back or > repay anything I borrowed. Better still, they never borrowed > money for anything except a house and car, and neither of > those was the fancy, luxurious items that many of today's > parents think THEIR children must have. My dad saved money > all year for his one-week's vacation. He didn't borrow money > for that. I worked summers to save money for college and as a > work-study student, I shelved books at the college library - > boring, boring, tedious work - and I signed my paycheck only > to give it right back to the bursar to apply to my tuition.
Gee, your anecdote really cleared that up. I work every day with investors and consumers. While I welcome a well-informed consumer, sadly, they are few and far between. Usually, they trust others to protect their interests with little concern for their own bottom line.
Seriously, businesses have spent the be...See MoreI really do ponder the condemning of this or that group for their lack of frugality. Just why is anyone surprised by people's lack of “consumer education”, when we are running an economy that depends on people being persuaded to make stupid purchases. That is what a consumer economy is all about!
Seriously, businesses have spent the better part of a century learning how to make people think that a luxury is a necessity. And today, the business world creates foolish consumers with a truckload of psychological techniques that are directly from the world of Sigmund Freud.
As much as advertising tells us that their products can make our life easier, it seems each generation is also a victim. The WWII generation was the victim of the tobacco industry. The Millennials – as children - were the victims of the sugar industry with its diabetes, obesity, and more.
However, IMHO, it was the boomers who were the first big-time victims of the maturation of advertising and propaganda. I am referring to the ideas put forth by Edward Bernays. This work started in the early 1900s, and received a major push with the propaganda of WWII. This matured the psychology of advertising just in time to destroy the humanity of the boomers. Thus we have those who insist that food stamp (SNAP) cuts are needed even when children are going hungry. They insist that you should not receive health care if you cannot pay for it.
But more, boomer poverty runs between 4&37; and 8&37;. The Millennial poverty rate is around 25&37;. Just what kind of a nation does this to their children!!!!!
Again IMHO, America's greatness was originally derived from a religious ethic that all humans – American or not – are important and should be helped when needed. Now we live in an economy in which businesses do not even believe in win-win deals – and the health insurance industry is a great example.
When you create such an economy, you should not be surprised by foolish consumers. You should not be surprise by an American foreign policy dominated by the use of force. Heck, we no longer care for our fellow Americans – much less foreigners. You should not be surprise by a government that will sell out the American people to the highest bidder. After all, in today's America, admiration is given to those who accumulate the greatest wealth.
All of this would be something you would expect from the current Neoliberal capitalism operating in this country. It is strange how so many believe there is nothing better than Neoliberal capitalism, yet they abhor the world it creates.