(10-11-2019 08:16 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I wonder how many NBA players will take a kneel in response to the Chinese national anthem?

None, of course.

I wonder how many NFL players, if in China for a game, would kneel for the USA anthem, then rise for the Chinese anthem. One of those is an "oppressive" country, to be sure.

(10-11-2019 09:10 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-11-2019 08:59 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(10-11-2019 08:16 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I wonder how many NBA players will take a kneel in response to the Chinese national anthem?

NBA cancels media availability for rest of China trip

Yet at the exact same time:

Portland Trail Blazers Join Boycott Against Israel ---
Team severs ties with company that works with Israeli Defense Forces

NBA is absolutely stepping in it with how they have responded to Morrey’s comments.

Also with the raft of fan ejections at games over the same issue.

I dont think the fan ejections will make fans obedient. Maybe that is the bomb-thrower in me coming out......

Not only the NBA, but Blizzard is also getting **** for banning a high-level Hearthstone player because he vocally supported Hong Kong after a match.

Lots of businesses seem to be willing to suppress and limit their "employees'" speech to avoid angering China. I'm really interested to see how many are willing to anger China and risk losing access to that market, in support of their "employees."

In the cases of the fans being ejected, and in the case of the Hearthstone player, the companies are actually restricting not just their 'employees' but their customers.

I think using your market power to restrict the voice of your consumers is actually more reprehensible than restricting the speech of employees.

First real direct clash of the 'China way' style of capitalism and the Western norms on Western turf; maybe the first direct exposure to the China Way for many in this country.

(10-11-2019 10:57 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  In the cases of the fans being ejected, and in the case of the Hearthstone player, the companies are actually restricting not just their 'employees' but their customers.

I think using your market power to restrict the voice of your consumers is actually more reprehensible than restricting the speech of employees.

First real direct clash of the 'China way' style of capitalism and the Western norms on Western turf; maybe the first direct exposure to the China Way for many in this country.

Agreed about the employees, which is why I was using quotes, especially since the Hearthstone player is a professional and has to compete within the Blizzard ecosystem, so he is less of a customer, but not a true Blizzard employee.

I guess this is where gun control is heading.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/a-k...li=BBnbfcL

(10-13-2019 08:21 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I guess this where gun control is heading.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/a-k...li=BBnbfcL

Yep, we'll have gun control, then knife control, then finger control.

(10-13-2019 08:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-13-2019 08:21 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I guess this where gun control is heading.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/a-k...li=BBnbfcL

Yep, we'll have gun control, then knife control, then finger control.

I wonder how they will run background checks for people who want fingers.

(10-13-2019 09:43 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-13-2019 08:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-13-2019 08:21 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I guess this where gun control is heading.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/a-k...li=BBnbfcL

Yep, we'll have gun control, then knife control, then finger control.

I wonder how they will run background checks for people who want fingers.

Courts in Lubbock are going to be packed.

(10-11-2019 11:01 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(10-11-2019 10:57 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  In the cases of the fans being ejected, and in the case of the Hearthstone player, the companies are actually restricting not just their 'employees' but their customers.

I think using your market power to restrict the voice of your consumers is actually more reprehensible than restricting the speech of employees.

First real direct clash of the 'China way' style of capitalism and the Western norms on Western turf; maybe the first direct exposure to the China Way for many in this country.

Agreed about the employees, which is why I was using quotes, especially since the Hearthstone player is a professional and has to compete within the Blizzard ecosystem, so he is less of a customer, but not a true Blizzard employee.

Here is video of a protester being ejected for a pro-Hong Kong sign and yell --- the ejection occurring as the Star Spangled Banner plays.

(10-04-2019 09:12 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(10-04-2019 09:10 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The Kavanaugh "confirmation hearings" were nothing more or less than a lynch mob. I frankly thought Kavanaugh was way too cooperative for way too long.

Lol. Kavanaugh was anything but cooperative. He took the Trump approach, no question.

Which is the right approach to take in a kangaroo court.

(10-13-2019 07:07 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-11-2019 11:01 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(10-11-2019 10:57 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  In the cases of the fans being ejected, and in the case of the Hearthstone player, the companies are actually restricting not just their 'employees' but their customers.

I think using your market power to restrict the voice of your consumers is actually more reprehensible than restricting the speech of employees.

First real direct clash of the 'China way' style of capitalism and the Western norms on Western turf; maybe the first direct exposure to the China Way for many in this country.

Agreed about the employees, which is why I was using quotes, especially since the Hearthstone player is a professional and has to compete within the Blizzard ecosystem, so he is less of a customer, but not a true Blizzard employee.

Here is video of a protester being ejected for a pro-Hong Kong sign and yell --- the ejection occurring as the Star Spangled Banner plays.

We are going to keep seeing things like this, and the NBA is going to have to figure out if they want to make China feel better or not piss off domestic fans. My hope is that companies start handing together to give China the big ‘ol middle finger, but access to the Chinese market is a pretty big draw.

(10-14-2019 12:53 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  We are going to keep seeing things like this, and the NBA is going to have to figure out if they want to make China feel better or not piss off domestic fans. My hope is that companies start handing together to give China the big ‘ol middle finger, but access to the Chinese market is a pretty big draw.

Yep.

Troubling, but then Elizabeth Warren is a *****, a slut, and a communist, so idk.

(10-14-2019 09:09 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-14-2019 12:53 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  We are going to keep seeing things like this, and the NBA is going to have to figure out if they want to make China feel better or not piss off domestic fans. My hope is that companies start handing together to give China the big ‘ol middle finger, but access to the Chinese market is a pretty big draw.

Yep.

Another factor in China's favor, at least with the American left, is that their government is non-white and Communist. If the Chinese government happened to be white, English-speaking, and non-Communist, one suspects the left would almost certainly be less reluctant criticize it, even with its $14 trillion economy.

If you think the left isn't critical of China, we should have a discussion about who we're defining as "The Left."

https://www.propublica.org/article/trump...sistencies

Stark differences in newly seen tax documents on two of Donald Trump's buildings show stark differences in reporting on expenses, profits and occupancy figures.

The discrepancies made the buildings appear more profitable to the lender — and less profitable to the officials who set the buildings’ property tax.

For instance, Trump told the lender that he took in twice as much rent from one building as he reported to tax authorities during the same year, 2017. He also gave conflicting occupancy figures for one of his signature skyscrapers, located at 40 Wall Street.

Time to talk some more about Warren's 1971 teacher job I guess......

(10-16-2019 06:54 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  https://www.propublica.org/article/trump...sistencies
Stark differences in newly seen tax documents on two of Donald Trump's buildings show stark differences in reporting on expenses, profits and occupancy figures.
The discrepancies made the buildings appear more profitable to the lender — and less profitable to the officials who set the buildings’ property tax.
For instance, Trump told the lender that he took in twice as much rent from one building as he reported to tax authorities during the same year, 2017. He also gave conflicting occupancy figures for one of his signature skyscrapers, located at 40 Wall Street.
Time to talk some more about Warren's 1971 teacher job I guess......

Are these documents for Trump personally or for an entity in which he has an ownership interest?
Who prepared and signed the applicable documents?
Are the tax and loan forms for exactly the same entity or property?
Are the tax forms prepared on a cash or accrual basis? The financial statements?

IIRC, the left was telling us a while back that Trump no longer had equity stakes in his real estate, because the banks had forced him into a position where he merely allowed the use of his name for a fee. If that is true, then Trump has no interest in or responsibility for the tax and financial reports. Which story is true?

Other questions come to mind, but for now I'll just ask one more. Does the person who wrote the article know anything about real estate accounting and finance?

(10-16-2019 07:29 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-16-2019 06:54 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  https://www.propublica.org/article/trump...sistencies
Stark differences in newly seen tax documents on two of Donald Trump's buildings show stark differences in reporting on expenses, profits and occupancy figures.
The discrepancies made the buildings appear more profitable to the lender — and less profitable to the officials who set the buildings’ property tax.
For instance, Trump told the lender that he took in twice as much rent from one building as he reported to tax authorities during the same year, 2017. He also gave conflicting occupancy figures for one of his signature skyscrapers, located at 40 Wall Street.
Time to talk some more about Warren's 1971 teacher job I guess......

Are these documents for Trump personally or for an entity in which he has an ownership interest?
Who prepared and signed the applicable documents?
Are the tax and loan forms for exactly the same entity or property?
Are the tax forms prepared on a cash or accrual basis? The financial statements?

IIRC, the left was telling us a while back that Trump no longer had equity stakes in his real estate, because the banks had forced him into a position where he merely allowed the use of his name for a fee. If that is true, then Trump has no interest in or responsibility for the tax and financial reports. Which story is true?

Other questions come to mind, but for now I'll just ask one more. Does the person who wrote the article know anything about real estate accounting and finance?

Did you read the article yet?

(10-16-2019 07:33 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(10-16-2019 07:29 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-16-2019 06:54 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  https://www.propublica.org/article/trump...sistencies
Stark differences in newly seen tax documents on two of Donald Trump's buildings show stark differences in reporting on expenses, profits and occupancy figures.
The discrepancies made the buildings appear more profitable to the lender — and less profitable to the officials who set the buildings’ property tax.
For instance, Trump told the lender that he took in twice as much rent from one building as he reported to tax authorities during the same year, 2017. He also gave conflicting occupancy figures for one of his signature skyscrapers, located at 40 Wall Street.
Time to talk some more about Warren's 1971 teacher job I guess......

Are these documents for Trump personally or for an entity in which he has an ownership interest?
Who prepared and signed the applicable documents?
Are the tax and loan forms for exactly the same entity or property?
Are the tax forms prepared on a cash or accrual basis? The financial statements?
IIRC, the left was telling us a while back that Trump no longer had equity stakes in his real estate, because the banks had forced him into a position where he merely allowed the use of his name for a fee. If that is true, then Trump has no interest in or responsibility for the tax and financial reports. Which story is true?
Other questions come to mind, but for now I'll just ask one more. Does the person who wrote the article know anything about real estate accounting and finance?

Did you read the article yet?

Yes, I did. That's why I asked the specific questions that I did.

(10-16-2019 07:29 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-16-2019 06:54 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  https://www.propublica.org/article/trump...sistencies
Stark differences in newly seen tax documents on two of Donald Trump's buildings show stark differences in reporting on expenses, profits and occupancy figures.
The discrepancies made the buildings appear more profitable to the lender — and less profitable to the officials who set the buildings’ property tax.
For instance, Trump told the lender that he took in twice as much rent from one building as he reported to tax authorities during the same year, 2017. He also gave conflicting occupancy figures for one of his signature skyscrapers, located at 40 Wall Street.
Time to talk some more about Warren's 1971 teacher job I guess......

Are these documents for Trump personally or for an entity in which he has an ownership interest?
Who prepared and signed the applicable documents?
Are the tax and loan forms for exactly the same entity or property?
Are the tax forms prepared on a cash or accrual basis? The financial statements?

IIRC, the left was telling us a while back that Trump no longer had equity stakes in his real estate, because the banks had forced him into a position where he merely allowed the use of his name for a fee. If that is true, then Trump has no interest in or responsibility for the tax and financial reports. Which story is true?

Other questions come to mind, but for now I'll just ask one more. Does the person who wrote the article know anything about real estate accounting and finance?

It isnt even clear that the documents refer to the same entity. I can think of twenty reasons to have nested entities with varying interests in a single piece of real estate.

For example, one entity might be the direct leasehold holder operator, one might be a sublessee special entity for a special portion of the property, one might be a limited partnership that holds title and leases to the operator, one might be a special purpose LLC that is the general partner for the LLP, one might be a loan/lien holder in order to derive pass through equity cost to bypass depreciation.

I mean even in the Hill Country I know one guy that has 5 entities related to a single 30 acre plot. One funds the project and is a lien holder with small equity stake in every other entity; one is the owner of the land; one is a leaseholder and the owner of the buildings; one is sublessee that operates the buildings and the owner of the commercial activities on the plot associated with the buildings; one is a lessee of the agri portion and the operator of the agri functions on the land.

Each one of those will have very different answers on the items in the article as to the various line items; and can easily have very different answers to an outside lender as well as a tax office.

But the study compares 'properties' --- nothing indicates that they even bothered to address the question of *which* entity and *what* that entity's function is.