the average person rips off a rich fuck, and it’s very likely that they’re dead. Trump is one of them. Or is perceived to be. different story for him, right?
I agree he should be in jail, but this is going to stop him from doing business in New York, where he built his empire and where a huge amount of his business is still done. So this hurts him even though it isn’t criminal.
It won’t hurt him other than financially and he’ll just get loans from various corrupt foreign entities and donations from his cult following to cover it. What are they going to do, slap his wrist harder? 🙄
Hurting him financially is a good thing, isn’t it? And not being able to do business in New York is a huge loss to the Trump family business. This isn’t a small thing. This means they have to do things like unload Trump Tower. Without making a profit.
Hurting him financially is a good thing, isn’t it?
In the same way that a slap on the wrist is better than nothing. As I explained above, it’s just a temporary setback that he’ll recover from quite easily since rich grifters can always get more money.
And not being able to do business in New York is a huge loss to the Trump family business.
Yes and no: the main family business is political grifting now, which much more than makes up for the loss
This means they have to do things like unload Trump Tower. Without making a profit.
Nope. It specifically says in the article that he gets the money from selling the businesses. Even when you factor in the fine, he’s gonna profit from that. Maybe even more than he would from running the companies.
“It’s the corporate death penalty,” said Diana Florence, a veteran financial crimes prosecutor for the Manhattan district attorney’s office, now in private practice.
“This ruling essentially dissolves his company,” she said, though she predicted that years of appeals may pass before anything actually happens.
Why you seem to think his corporation going under doesn’t hurt him at all is beyond me. It’s like if Tim Cook became a politician and you claiming that Apple going under because of an antitrust case doesn’t hurt Tim Cook. Of course it would. He’s built his entire reputation on being a successful businessman.
I’m not saying it doesn’t hurt him at all, I’m saying it doesn’t hurt him anywhere near enough.
If Tim Cook pivoted to getting many times more of his personal income from political scams than from Apple, then your comparison MIGHT make sense, except even then it would be very far from an apples to apples comparison, pun intended.
He’s built his entire reputation on being a successful businessman.
He’s built his image on PRETENDING to be successful businessman and then pivoting to leader of a Christofascist cult.
He was never good at business (as evidenced by losing a billion dollars total in a decade where every other ultrarich person was profiting like crazy) and he no longer needs the real estate empire.
Sorry… you’re saying he will raise a the same amount in 8 weeks as he did right after the election when everyone was fired up? And not cover all of his expenses but still pay all of his debt?
No. I’m saying that he’ll raise that and more right after playing the marty, which is getting his cult all riled up. Might take longer than 8 weeks but he’s definitely going to get there. Nothing silly about acknowledging that tragic yet inescapable fact of his cult appeal.
Why would he raise more than he raised after the election over this court case? How is he going to raise $1.2 billion on top of all of his expenses, which runs into the tens if not hundreds of millions?
Even if he didn’t want to spend it on election expenses, he has a bunch of criminal cases he needs to pay for before he can even think about touching his debt.
So basically, you’re claiming that this won’t hurt him at all because he’ll raise billions of dollars, more than he’s ever raised before, when there’s absolutely no sign of that happening.
Well, I guess the Trump business should be allowed to continue to operate in New York since this doesn’t matter. Not sure why they even had a civil case in the first place.
Why would he raise more than he raised after the election over this court case?
Over more time and by playing the persecuted martyr. Do try to keep up.
$1.2 billion on top of all of his expenses
Him being a bad enough businessman to lose that much even while cheating had nothing to do with the case or our discussion about the outcome of it. Please don’t move the goalposts.
So basically, you’re claiming that this won’t hurt him at all
No, I’m saying it won’t hurt him much in the long run. There’s a difference.
billions of dollars
Again, leave those goalposts alone.
Well, I guess the Trump business should be allowed to continue to operate in New York since this doesn’t matter
Nobody’s said that. Don’t start with the strawmen.
Not sure why they even had a civil case in the first place.
You’re sorta right: should have been a criminal case in the first place since it was a case about him committing criminal fraud crime, which is not a civil matter.
You absolutely are suggesting that. You’re saying this won’t hurt him. You’re saying he will definitely raise $1.2 billion on top of all of his expenses now that the Trump business is effectively dissolved. So that means there was absolutely no point in dissolving it. Why dissolve it if it does nothing?
And I’m not interested in repeatedly defending against a wholly fictional version of what I’ve said and moved goalposts, so stopping is fine by me. Have the day you deserve.
“Have the day you deserve?” Wow. Yeah, that was warranted over an internet argument. I don’t wish you “have the day you deserve.” Whatever people who insult over the internet when they wouldn’t do that if they were in the same room with that person deserve. I wish you have a good day. Because I don’t want people to have bad days.
I promise you it will. Mar a Lago may be his home, but NY is his ‘spiritual home’ (if you can compare his lust for money and power to religious fervour).
Trump is incredibly thin-skinned. Being convicted of such large-scale fraud and banned from doing business in NY will be a massive blow to his giant ego. Further, angry people get sloppy and tend to make silly (sillier?) mistakes.
Used to be, but now he despises it and the feeling is mutual.
Trump is incredibly thin-skinned. Being convicted of such large-scale fraud and banned from doing business in NY will be a massive blow to his giant ego
True, but so was being indicted at all. Hurting his fragile ego is a REALLY low bar when it comes to holding him accountable for his lifetime of crimes.
Further, angry people get sloppy and tend to make silly (sillier?) mistakes.
For which he’ll ALSO get a slap on the wrist, if anything.
You know what would be a MUCH worse blow to his ego btw?
Several years of community service. Forcing him to be genuinely helpful towards those less fortunate than himself would be much worse for him than prison and would actually have him be a benefit to society for the first time in his miserable hyperprivileged life.
I get what you’re saying, but this is so close to nothing compared to the magnitude of his multiple crimes over the last 40 years or so that it might as well be nothing.
You know you live in a third world country if you have discussions about how to kill your citizens. There is no need for the death penalty but a twisted and false sense of justice.
Apparently it’s a hot take: there are people who exist that we would all absolutely be better off were they dead.
This guy was someone who was paid to kill another person for a thousand dollars. This is not just “a citizen” unless you’re saying it makes sense to keep people around in society that will fucking murder someone for less than a months pay.
That’s what they say, even keeping him locked up for life would be cheaper. Also how do you decide what’s gruesome enough to justify killing people, what about wrongfully convicted people they do exist and they got murdered. There are so many good arguments against and do few if any for the death penalty it’s mind-blowing to me how any more or less democratic society doesn’t abolish it.
TL;DR: No, there are plenty of good reasons why the death penalty should exist. The problem isn’t the penalty, it’s the people pointing it at innocents because it’s harder to prove guilt beyond a shadow of doubt. THAT is what needs reform, not the penalty. Otherwise you’re successfully putting more people into slavery when they just shouldn’t be consuming resources anymore, period.
This person isn’t wrongfully convicted, he’s been fighting his death penalty for years. He quite literally confessed, and his confession drove the man responsible for the hiring (it was through a third party) to kill himself.
Yes yes yes, “but what ifs” are very nice for people that don’t actually want to make hard decisions. The bottom line is bad people exist and should be killed. This man doesn’t deserve rights beyond those afforded to people who are sentenced to death.
The expense of the death penalty is related to the trials that are held, almost always in opposition of the ruling. If you were to compare the actual cost of the penalty itself to the cost of keeping someone in slavery, you would find that the numbers don’t support you.
The reality is you don’t have a problem with the death penalty, you have a problem with the people proposing the death penalty because not enough preparation goes into it. Which is perfectly rational, because if they are not proven beyond a shadow of doubt to be guilty then the death penalty should simply not be on the table.
The problem isn’t the sentence, the problem is people not treating human lives with enough respect when giving the sentence. Both things can be true. Literally point to any fascist/ authoritarian and suddenly the death penality doesn’t seem so bad. No one cried for Bin Laden being obliterated, no one would cry for a convicted hitman being killed.
Where state sanctioned killing is introduced violent crime and homicide typically rise afterwards. Potentially because society is saying its ok to kill someone if they really deserve it and your sure.
It is near impossible to be 100% certain of someone’s guilt. Even with confessions. They could be protecting someone or simply not of right mind. If the state makes a mistake it is permanent and is murder in my opinion.
Pricing has to take into account the legal costs a a printed with being as sure as possible etc. Even then there are cases of wrongful execution.
Those are some wild statements you make. Yes I have a problem with the penalty bc I think it’s wrong, simple as that. But I live in a country where punishment is fundamentally based on the idea of rehabilitation. And that often even applies for murderers. So I think that’s part of why I’m so opposed to the death penalty.
I doubt we can convince each other from our standpoints. So all I can say is have a great day.
I have a problem with your ridiculously vague statement of
The bottom line is bad people exist and should be killed
What makes a bad person? That they committed a crime (which crime, how bad is bad), that they show no remorse, that they are incapable of change (were they born evil or a victim of circumstance)?
You only have to look at how quickly decisions of law are changing (roe v wade for better or worse, definitely worse) to realise deciding on life ending ‘justice’ based on a human court of due process (where even confessing can be flawed) is fundamentally flawed.
How does it impact your day to day if we choose to incarcerate them instead?
But also, a little extra compassion in life would do you zero harm.
No one cried for Bin Laden being obliterated, no one would cry for a convicted hitman being killed.
Thats simply not true. I myself would very much rather have seen Bin Laden in Jail (and of course a due process beforehand), likewise Saddam or even Hitler…
I never said this is a person that society needs to keep around.
I do not believe that living is a right that can be earned or unearned. It is a right everyone has. If a person is unfit for society they need to be seperated from society. If that means having them in prison for live than that is what we should do. Killing them is done for one purpose mainly: Because it gives some people a sense of justice. This sense of justice however is false as the only justice would be to undo what was done.
Congratulations, the laws of reality disagree with you. When authoritarians are knocking down your door to tear your life apart, remember: you decided to let them live.
When the authoritarians are knocking down your door you’ll think “I wish I had given the government more power to kill people. Only when the government can legally kill people are we safe from tyranny.”
Nice. If someone disagrees with you they are diasgreeing with reality? Sure makes sense. And nobody told me i personally can decide who is going to live. Damn man, now i feel bad about all those executions i could have stopped.
Counterpoint: Given the number of people in government who said government should murder me because of the rainbow pin on my lapel, I don’t want government to have the power to murder anyone even if we all agree they deserve it. What makes you think that this is the one thing the government is competent at?
The government is just fine at murdering people, innocent, guilty, it’s all the same. They’ll even fight to kill people regardless of overwhelming evidence of innocence. Sometimes they have to try a few times to kill the person, but if they murder them in the street, its a great way to get a paid vacation.
Even if you’re right, that doesn’t mean we should actually kill them. People are people, they should be treated as such. We can throw them in jail far easier, and to the rest of us, it’s equivalent to them being dead.
Here’s the thing though.
I agree 100% that the world is probably better off without this asshole in it.
But I don’t think we should be doing that. For every one of these guys, you’ll have another guy who got railroaded by a crooked prosecutor, or who will later be proven innocent with better DNA testing. There’s just no way to be sure every one is ‘good’, and I’d rather let bad people live than accidentally kill good people.
People on death row are more expensive than on life sentence. You could have them work without making it slave like but talking about the U.S. prison system in general just makes me want to throw up. Its no wonder that people would argue for killing if they dont view inmates a human beings. I guess there is a special flavor of “humanism” in the U.S. I can tell you the european countries are doing quite well without enslaving and killing their inmates.
Why isn’t he championing a massive raise in minimum wage? Everyone other than the rich are struggling. Is he just trying to make cars even more expensive than they already have gotten here? I’m in my 40s and my first house cost less than an average new car today. Help all the people, man.
Because all that would accomplish right now is get some asshole on the Internet to comment “if that’s the case why doesn’t he do something about it?” Or “why doesn’t he do something about Medicare?”
Does he need to give a 6 hour speech outlining every policy he supports every day to satisfy you?
He has asked Congress to legislate a higher minimum wage. He issued an executive order requiring federal contractors to raise their minimum wage to qualify for government contracts.
What are YOU doing to raise the minimum wage of you care so much about it? Are you contacting your representatives? Your state can raise its own minimum wage: are you harassing those officials?
Or are you just trying to criticize Biden and draw attention away from his strike support on the Internet?
The problem is that owners are profiting off of labor while not doing any real work themselves.
The rich need to make less profit so ‘everyone other than the rich’ can have more. It’s that simple, not sure why it needs to be spelled out for you.
This should not be paid for by raising prices. It should be paid for by people wealthier than you making less profit while still being wealthier than you can ever hope to be.
I’m in my 40s and my first house cost less than an average new car today.
That’s because people like you don’t understand how basic economics work, so you’re routinely taken advantage of by people who do.
Having watched a lot of Louis rossmann videos on NY, you need those displayed at your business to be allowed to operate it. If you do not have them, they will shut you down and fine you.
Whether or not they will enforce it here is another question, but NY seems to not fuck around with that, since corporate taxes and fines are a large contributor to their state income.
It’s not just an issue for the government. Banks will not open accounts for you if you aren’t registered with the state you do business in. If you already have accounts and they find out you are no longer registered, they close your accounts.
No, you can’t use an old registration. They check an online database with the secretary of state. It updates daily.
Per the agreement, AI cannot be used to write or rewrite scripts, and AI-generated writing cannot be considered source material, which prevents writers from losing out on writing credits due to AI.
On an individual level, writers can choose to use AI tools if they so desire. However, a company cannot mandate that writers use certain AI tools while working on a production. Studios must also tell writers if they are given any AI-generated materials to incorporate into a work.
It is just a tool, if a writer can use it, why not? But without the writers and the involvement of humans to verify and edit the work, might as well just have the public use their own AI units instead of paying a studio for something they didn’t put any hours into.
I do think this is the most reasonable compromise here, but to answer your question.
Why should artists not use generative models for their art process?
Simply, it takes away a lot of the creative part of the art process away. You might say that these models are just more efficiently doing what humans do, taking in source material, and reinterpreting it in a different context.
These models however are not creative, they can only ever recreate patterns from the training data. This is completely different from humans who can create wholly original ideas and patterns.
Putting this process in the middle of art creation will probably lead to even more stagnation and cultural death.
Whenever there is a writer strike I picture a bunch of writers just writing like crazy when they aren’t on the picket line. Then when it’s over I expect a bunch of new entertainment offerings to show up. Caveat: I know zero about the business.
No, no, no everyone knows you must turn off all creative thought during a writers strike lol. I agree but did we get a bunch good stuff during the last one? I remember after the last one got bunch of new reality garbage.
Low interest rates also hurt the working class. It’s a contributing factor to the massive increase in housing prices. No matter how things go, the rich will always win out at the expense of everyone else.
I don’t understand this logic… low interest rates means it’s easier to borrow, which most poor people have to do to get anything. I think most cars have monthly payments right? Rate goes up- payment goes up. Richard Wolff talks about this alot on the socialist program. But you’re right in saying the rich are not impacted. Because they generally have savings and benefit from high interest rates.
It’s easier to borrow for rich people too, and they have a lot more money to borrow with, so they can pull out cheap loans and buy everything up. If rates are higher then the poor can’t afford current prices, but current prices were driven up by low interest rates. The rich and the poor borrow for different reasons. The poor borrow because otherwise they can’t afford the things, the rich borrow because it seems like a good investment. That’s how you get things like housing as an investment instead of as shelter.
You’re getting voted down but it’s true: Prison work can be forced upon the prisoner in the US and is legally defined as slavery to anyone with half a brain. It is explicitly allowed in the constitution.
While the situations are still quite different, the basic fact that the government forces work on those it imprisons … is NOT unique to China. At all.
news
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.