Trump may be no Objectivist but Binswanger misrepresents himReader comment on: A Weak Argument Against Trump Submitted by Mark Hunter (United States), Mar 9, 2016 20:16 Mr. Binswanger lists three avenues of ill-gotten wealth:
Nix the third, eminent domain. Trump lost money *trying* to use eminent domain, twice: once in the U.S. and once in Scotland. He tried but he lost in court both times. Financially they were losses. (Of course he shouldn't have tried but that's not the issue here.) Perhaps the second, special privileges, refers to (A) being allowed to bypass local regulations that shouldn't have been in force anyway, and (B) getting abatements of taxes that shouldn't have been in force anyway. Trump donated to politicians to in effect bribe them so he could do what he would have been free to do in a future capitalist society. You could as well trash the fictional Taggart Transcontinental considering its fictional history. As for the first avenue of ill-gotten wealth, government loans, can Mr. Binswanger provide us a reference? All I can find so far is Mainstream Media commentators *calling* tax breaks "loans." Since "special privileges" is a catch-all, Mr. Binswanger's fourth avenue, "etc.," is just propaganda unless he can be explicit. At this point we have zero out of four. Trump may be no Objectivist – hey, he's no Objectivist for sure – but he probably earned most – most as in almost all – of his weath. Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing. Submit a comment on this article Other reader comments on this item
Comment on this item |
ADVERTISEMENT |