By now it is well known (although not as well known as it should be) that Donald Trump is a dishonest businessman who takes advantage of contractors as part of his standard operating procedure. Of course, each and every one of those contractors has a unique story, even if they mostly wind up sounding the same. Here’s one from J. Michael Diehl, the retired owner of Freehold Music Center in Freehold, N.J., a store that is still open and operated by his sons.
My relationship with Trump began in 1989, when he asked me to supply several grand and upright pianos to his then-new Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City. I’d been running a music store for more than 30 years at that point, selling instruments to local schools and residents. My business was very much a family affair (my grandsons still run the store). And I had a great relationship with my customers — no one had ever failed to pay.
I was thrilled to get a $100,000 contract from Trump. It was one of the biggest sales I’d ever made. I was supposed to deliver and tune the pianos; the Trump corporation would pay me within 90 days. I asked my lawyer if I should ask for payment upfront, and he laughed. “It’s Donald Trump!” he told me. “He’s got lots of money.”
[Black voters won’t ever like Trump. The debate showed why.]
But when I requested payment, the Trump corporation hemmed and hawed. Its executives avoided my calls and crafted excuses. After a couple of months, I got a letter telling me that the casino was short on funds. They would pay 70 percent of what they owed me. There was no negotiating. I didn’t know what to do — I couldn’t afford to sue the Trump corporation, and I needed money to pay my piano suppliers. So I took the $70,000.
Losing $30,000 was a big hit to me and my family. The profit from Trump was meant to be a big part of my salary for the year. So I made much less. There was no money to help grow my business. I had less pianos in the showroom and a smaller advertising budget. Because of Trump, my store stagnated for a couple of years. It made me feel really bad, like I’d been taken advantage of. I was embarrassed.
Freehold is just down the road on the way to the shore from where I grew up. One of my wife’s closest friends lives there. It’s where New Jersey’s patron saint Bruce Springsteen grew up, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he was a frequent customer at the Freehold Music Center. Maybe that’s where his mom rented him his first guitar.
It’s hard not to take Trump’s behavior a little personally.
Stomping on little people is what he does, and then he tells you how smart he is to treat people this way.
Here’s a message for Trump from the Boss.
That is exactly the way he plans to run the country. After much hee-hawing and stalling it will always come down to 70 cents…or less…on the dollar.
Take it or leave it.
Domestically and internationally.
Hillary, on the other hand, will overpay and under-collect.
What the hell…she ain’t scuffling!!! Neither are her allies.
This may be the biggest difference between the two candidates.
Be a tight-fisted, rude, arrogant bastard and make enemies or be oh so nice while you stab entities in the back and make other enemies.
That’s how she handled Bernie Sanders, right?
That’s the story in Syria, too.
Scylla and Charybdis redux.
Nice.
AG
On what basis is this comment down ratable by 2 commenters? Because it’s not-pro Hillary? Other reasons? I’d like to be informed as to why. Unless there’s a reasonable, informed reason for giving a 1 rating, I will likely uprate.
Marduk has some kind of thing against AG, just downrates him based on nothing except that it’s an AG comment. maybe bazzz is Marduk’s sock puppet
Thats some great investigative reporting.
You do sound somewhat paranoid, something i noticed before.
One of these statements is sarcasm.
The good old false equivalence.
If you cant see the difference of the evil, fuck -upvote this stupid and not contributing comment.
Fucking fuck- do one better,really stick it to me! -Vow you will vote for trump, they are both evil, so it doesnt matter ,right?
Thank you, Heart.
I don’t want to see this blog downrate into dKos Jr. That’s what this kind of bullshit does. If I see it happening elsewhere here I will uprate every time.
It’s the only real defense.
AG
Posted earlier as a comment in diary by Arthur Gilroy – Robo-ratings on Booman Trib.
BooMan has a set of guidelines!
Trollish behavior by marduk
Easiest way to find the trollish ratings by marduk via his own ratings page – link here.
AG, may the 4’s be with You …
Bet on it! 😉
It’s always unfortunate to see someone get their feelings hurt. I hope everyone feels better.
.
basis does it merit 3 uprates?
At least since I noticed (going back roughly to the early primary season) that a lot of ratings here increasingly seemed to reflect factional solidarity more than objective assessment of value or contribution of a post’s content, I’ve attempted to pay less and less attention to them.
IMO, uprating a post in protest to someone’s downrate that you disagree with (or v.v.) borders on silly (unless already across that line).
One reason, imo, ratings here have become quite uncorrelated with any reasonable assessment of quality, value, contribution, etc.
So typical of Trump. WHY isn’t Hillary running ads about this scumbag similar to the ones Obama ran about people whose jobs were lost due to the machinations of Vulture-capitalist Romney? It’s basically the same fook-the-little-guy M.O. Obama’s ads packed a real wallop in 2012, because they were so true.
It amazes me that Trump supporters still don’t see him as just another variation of the GOP’s long con job on the middle class.
And yes, this is exactly how a Trump presidency would operate. He’ll see America as an acquisition he can loot and abuse at will.
Yeah, the equivalent ad to the “I built my own coffin” one about Romney. It could be used with either stiffed contractors or Trump U victims (although they may not want to speak with the lawsuit pending).
“The retired, 88-year-old owner of the Freehold Music Center says in a new advertisement by Hillary Clinton’s campaign he feels as if Donald Trump stole $30,000 from him…”
(from the linked article in the above post)
It’s Hillary. Every time — every time — someone says “Why doesn’t she do X” – or talk about X, or have a position paper about X — she already does.
And no one’s paying any attention….
Yes, it must be something about her. She’s just so dis-LIKE-able! Here, btw, is a link to the ad.
https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/755374488213086209
It wasn’t clear from Boo’s piece that the story was in a campaign ad. If she’s doing this, so much the better. My observation certainly wasn’t intended as a a “Hate Hillary” complaint.
No, I appreciate that. But it was a complaint, and a baseless one. A complaint that she is just not doing what she should be doing. When in fact , from what I can tell, she is doing EVERYTHING. She has a huge ground operation. She is coming out with great ads. She is following a gigantically punishing schedule, giving speeches left and right. Her website has detailed policy prescriptions, farther to the left than any candidate for president in my lifetime. She just doesn’t get credit for it, even among people who should be her biggest supporters.
Why is that?
She’s an old school baby boomer technocrat with a hawkish foreign policy and a gift of only supporting left-wing issues when it’s convenient. In essence, she’s a classic politician when both Republicans and Democrats are clearly annoyed with classic politicians, for good reasons.
On top of that, she’s a she, and she’s a Clinton.
Mainly B.S but with a golden nugget: she’s a she.
Or in others words, like most women,they’re ok until they want a promotion.
For the past 25 years, it’s been proven over and over again that where there’s smoke…there’s a smoke machine. But most of the populace is complacent enough with believing what’s been put out there, that they just don’t care.
OT, but http://larrysummers.com/2016/09/26/men-without-work/
It’s Larry Summers. I don’t know what to think.
Interesting and on the simple level it’s presented, makes sense.
Just one question. Must we insist on a forty hour workweek?
Of course not. However, as currently configured, the average worker can’t afford a 32 hour work week that produces only 80% of their 40 hour work week earnings. A not insignificant portion of the laborers can’t make it on forty hours and therefore, work more than that.
If we want to eat and have a roof over our head at the same time, yes.
So long as we treat society as a zero-sum game, where the only way to get more is take it from someone else, we will be in this situation.
Eventually the people getting taken from get tired of it. If they’re gentle about it, they tax the crap out of the rich.
If not they just take about some off the top…of the shoulders.
I suppose you’re right but there was a time when everyone worked many more hours,a,week. Somehow we,found a way to do it at forty hours. Other places on this planet work less and/or take a lot more time off than we do. Here, as you say, we need to take it from someone else in a zero sum game. How,do they do it and how did we get here? There are any number of things we “can’t” do, like universal health care and free education. But others do it. I think one needs to set a goal of real full employment and sharing of productivity gains as a starter. As it,is now, that graph is only showing us there is severe underemployment that we have not addressed. That underemployment is a resource we need to,employ to increase our gross national product. I guess we need to first strive to improve our lot.
Here’s another thought. We spend over $3.2 trillion a year on health care. Many others with universal care spend half that with better outcomes. So if we cut that in half what happens to the extra trillion or so a year? More unemployment? Or reallocated to other productive efforts or free time?
That’s $3.2 trillion for non-universal care. And a huge portion of those that do access care claim they don’t get enough care because it’s either denied by the insurance carrier or they can’t afford the co-pays.
As there is little to no surplus medical care capacity in the US health industry, one must ask where such a theoretical spending cut could be made and by what entities? And who bears the brunt of those cuts. Medical personnel? Those that already get little to no care or claim insufficient care? Or those will full access to all that modern medicine has to offer?
Another note; it’s not possible to reduce US medical costs (in the aggregate) to the level of many countries with high quality UHC because we have higher rates of gun violence (injuries and deaths), higher rates of injuries in automobile accidents, higher rates of disability from US military actions, and while the incidence of mental illness in the US is similar to that in other countries, early treatment is much lower.
Don’t forget that we also subsidize the drug companies — paying much more for scrips than many other nations.
And support the insurance companies.
So too do several countries with UHC. The difference is that their medical insurance companies are highly regulated utilities and according to this WHO report, the US insurance company administrative costs aren’t much different from other companies.
Or we subsidize those other countries that pay less.
you mean companies like Gilead and Mylan?
I saw a commentary awhile ago saying something quite different, that we access medical care more frequently and pay far too much for pretty much everything. But any improvement in cost and outcomes will only come with significant changes. There is no doubt about that. We have many duplicates of services and administrative functions and never forget the profit motives that allow companies to drive generics like the price of epipens to $600. Obamacare was an improvement but it certainly needs to evolve.
If you want a good analysis of why we spend twice what other OECD countries do and twice as much as france the nearest to us, google “national cost of health care compared to other countries”. There are a number of different articles of where we fail and where we are better.
Like the peace dividend, it would evaporate into thin air.
Yes, it will. It will unless we find a way to stop it from enriching a few.
Larry is highlighting a structural issue that definitely needs to be solved.
As late as 1916, 32% of the population lived on farms, down fro 60+% in 1850. Now it’s below 2% I believe. Think of how much more productive that 2% is now than the 32% in 1916. In absolute numbers that’s 32M down to 5M. And we export like crazy.
Manufacturing is headed the same way. Output is up significantly but employment in manufacturing is declining. As Summers points out there won’t be nearly enough work by mid-century. I would say there is already a shortage it’s just becoming more serious after each recession. This is a big part of secular stagnation.
We need a post-manufacturing/industrial income sharing/equity model that keeps the entire population motivated, productive, and fairly sharing in the increases in society’s income and wealth.
When manufacturing jobs are 2% of the population and even service jobs are replaced by robots in large measure what will be society’s obligation to people who can’t contribute in traditional jobs? What do they do? How are the compensated? How are they incented do the right things?
It’s partly an economic problem but not a market problem. Efficient markets and technology are doing what they do best – innovating. But if the current division of wealth, education, and opportunity are frozen in place for future generations then income mobility will be only sideways/downward.
This is a much more serious long term problem than global warming. As you can see from the behavior of the 1% they are perfectly happy to keep skimming all the productivity gained income for themselves and obliterate all the classes below them.
Larry and other non-freshwater economists understand the unsustainability of the current paradigm.
There will need to be a new social contract that re-defines well compensated work more broadly. More progressivity in the tax code, start compensating stay at home moms, a return to the college funding model of the 60’s and 70’s, more infrastructure spending that benefits all classes, valuing service work like unionized semi-skilled manufacturing jobs used to be, treat teachers as professionals, etc. would be a start.
Just like the last gilded age lead to strong unions that won WWII, built the best defense, created a broad middle class, the current generation needs to be figuring out the next paradigm shift needed to rebuild the middle class. And making markets even more efficient for the 1%, staying on the current globalization trends, deregulating industries are not drivers of the new paradigm that’s needed.
We need a new Adam Smith to provide a framework that includes much more than just efficient markets to serve the greatest good for society and all classes.
I pretty much agree with all of that. I would say it another way. In the past,say early last century, the federal government was not a big factor in people’s lives and economic activities. We have now evolved to the point where government is very necessary to ensure a fair division of our national output and gains in productivity and to ensure full employment at living wages. The inequality issue is far more serious than we commonly think. We must prevent a small minority from becoming the true nobles of the day and controlling all the wealth.
It’s tough to be a construction contractor. However, it should be known that the owners are generally Republicans for three reasons: 1) lower business/corporate tax rates 2) less regulation and 3) anti-union. It’s no secret that developers are generally the worst owners to work for. That contractors work for them at their own risk.
Contractors could through their associations demand legislation that better protects them from sleazebag developers like Trump. Or contractors as a whole could require certain standard guarantees that have a long and solid history of being successful. But they haven’t and don’t.
Savvy contractors only work for the very best and reputable developer/owners. However, it does require them to be in a position to pass on higher financial risk jobs that they may need.
I’ve forgotten almost all the details because it was too long ago. What remains is a feeling of being on very thin ice when putting together a deal in NJ that involved a developer. It worked out, but avoiding developers remained my usual MO.
It takes great courage for people to come forward about this stuff. Part of Trumps shtick is to attack, in personal ways, the ones that take it public. Like what he is doing to Ms. Machado. It’s not just to silence her, but to warn others, like Mr Diehl, that coming forward will probably ruin their lives and destroy their business. Most will never take that gamble.
.
In my part of the world we call it putting the (dead) coyote on the fence. As a warning.
It never ends with Trump. He will end whatever respect we commonly give to each other. We will become a nation of cynics finding more wrong than right with our neighbors.
That horse was last seen galloping down the road with the barn door super-glued to his back, not later than 1979.
I just saw a clip of a very recent Trump rally – either yesterday or today, don’t know where. Trump’s fans there were whooping and cheering that Trump never pays any income taxes. They think it’s GREAT, and they think that makes Trump savvy and smart.
Galling considering that these same people would probably turn around in a NY minute and diss poverty stricken Americans who don’t make enough money to pay federal taxes (although they pay plenty of other regressive fees and taxes).
Funny how Trump’s fans LOVE it when the rich stick it to the rest of us. They think it’s just great. Ye olde Kiss Up, Kick Down at work. I don’t get it myself.
Mr. Diehl is just one amoung many who got the royal shaft from Trump and struggled because of it. I guess Trump’s fans would say Mr. Diehl had it coming or something.
As they been voting for tax cuts (zero is their goal) for at least forty years, wouldn’t they be hypocrites if that didn’t whoop and holler approval for Trump not paying any? And if they didn’t, you’d be crabbing about them being hypocrites.
Liberals and Democrats need to sharpen their critiques because what we’ve been doing for forty odd years isn’t working, unless the goal is to continue advancing neo-liberal economics and neo-con FP.
The primary goal of these people is to break the government, even if it hurts their own interest.
“their own interest” as defined by who?
If we’re honest, neo-con FP is in the interest of a majority of Americans. It’s not humane nor admirable, but it keeps the oil flowing, the military industrial businesses going, and provides a good living for the military and NS contractors and a job of last resort for many young Americans.
Neo-liberal economic policies are good for at least ten percent of the population (and good enough for at least 20%). That translates to roughly 40% of the electorate. They vote their interests and don’t give a damn about the 80% of the population that is being harmed. Should we praise them for having figured out who better butters their bread?
I think you give these voters too much credit in terms of for whom and how they vote. The NeoCon conservatives, especially now, are mainly brainwashed by the rightwing media wurlitzer to vote against liberals/democrats, whom they’ve been reliably convinced to view as the enemy of all times. Plus they’ve been invigorated now to be out loud and proud of their bigotry and racism, etc. This voting block mainly pines after something that never truly existed, but there were times of white supremacy in this nation. That’s what they’ve been mis-led to believe is “solution” to everything.
Most conservative voters (and many democratic ones, as well) are well nigh clueless about how this nation is actually run, much less issues about why, really, the MIC exists, what’s really going with oil, etc. Yeah, they may “get it” that the Military provides jobs, and maybe some of them have jobs in the oil industry or with private industry serving the military. But that’s a far as it goes.
Trump’s main fans are interested in white supremacy, and that’s about it. They’re not even that concerned about jobs, the economy, how jobs have been off-shored, TPP, NAFTA, etc, no matter how much Trump talks about it. It’s all about white supremacy and beating down on minorities.
You may be missing my point. Denigrating the GOP half or more of the electorate as mindless boobs, which is what Democrats/liberals have been doing for decades, hasn’t been constructive. Nor do Democrats/liberals acknowledge that on the other side of the aisle, they say the same thing about Democrats/liberals. Both sides have their well-worn tropes that keep their rubes in line. Meanwhile, income/wealth inequality continues to increase, US infrastructure continues to crumble, and US national debt is higher than ever. What portion of the electorate asked for or wants any of that? 1%, 5%, and no more than 10%. And which nominee/Party is offering anything other than that?
So easy to throw out “Trump’s main fans are interested in white supremacy, and that’s about it.” because there’s some truth to it. Not that much different from Romney’s “47% want free stuff” because there is truth in that as well. Either party could nominate an Attila the Hun and get near 40% of the national vote. So, I don’t think that the GOP base electorate has a lock on mindless, self-centered voters.
OK. Fair enough, but I’m not sure how one penetrates the propaganda wurlitzer which mainly influences GOP voters who are mostly addicted to a steady diet of lies, hype, spin and bs pumped out by the usual suspects in the media, Hate Radio & their “Christiany” Mega Churches. I can state unhesitatingly – from witnessing what has happened in my own family – that these people are brainwashed, and reality simply doesn’t penetrate. There are powerful people with tons of money to perpetuate this.
My family are not mindless boobs, which is even more concerning. They are actually highly educated, pretty sophisticated people who have traveled extensively overseas. And yet, they’re only about 2 steps up from the mindless boobs (and they are that) one witnesses at Trump rallies.
Yeah, it doesn’t “help” to label them as what they are because it doesn’t win hearts and minds. Agreed.
But I have no clue how to penetrate the armor they’ve built up over the past 40+ decades listening to/watching Fox, Rush, Glenn, their ministers, etc.
Calling it out for what it is.
I agree that many Democratic voters are equally reflexive in their voting habits. I’m probably biased, but at least I have friends and acquaintances who do question things even a little bit and make at least some passing effort at locting different points of view. I simply see nothing even remotely like that on the conservative side of aisle.
Most unfortunate, but I still feel – maybe just bc it makes me feel like I’ve accomplished something?? – it’s worth pointing out the fallacies and hypocrisies of their positions – such as praising Trump for not paying any taxes while beating down on poor people who don’t earn enough to pay fed taxes (and are not doing something wrong, thereby). That’s just me… sometimes letting off steam. I’m tired of people knowing that they’ve been lied to and saying: I don’t care. I’m voting for him anyway.
I am CLUELESS how to untangle this juggernaut, and we’re dealing with a significant portion of the US populace who so bought into their not-reality POVs that attempting to get them to realize how badly they’ve been lied to and conned is nigh onto impossible. It means that they have to question EVERYTHING… including their faith. Pretty tough, especially for those who think their faith is rooted in “truth.” I do, on my better days, feel truly sorry for them. They’ve been led astray by a bunch of cynical shitheads. That’s my truth.
Everyone on the left is CLUELESS as to untangle the juggernaut. And that cluelessness blinds us to our contribution to it and how we respond and act in ways not dissimilar to the GOP juggernaut.
They’ve got their churches and we’ve got ours. Or do you seriously not think that HRC’s primary southern firewall was centered in the Black churches? It’s more blatant than it once was but get real; churches have long participated in the split between Republicans and Democrats. That certain religious communities switch sides over time is also not new. Some have even been apolitical or didn’t participate in politics during various periods.
At this point, I can imagine that Republicans are feeling somewhat smug for have succeeded in rejecting the hacks their party elites attempted to foist on them in this election. And it’s not as if they see something all that different in Trump; only that he’s not mealy-mouthed in expressing what all the GOP politicians have been saying for decades. The previously demonstrated that they’re okay with stupid and/or cognitive impairment with Reagan and GWB. (And GHWB was no rocket scientist.) It’s actually somewhat refreshing (and could indicate a change) that they didn’t demand their standard religious tests for this nominee.
They probably don’t get that had the GOP elites selected the nominee in advance and set up all the mechanisms to get her/him the nomination that they couldn’t have succeeded in rejecting that person. So, they’re pride is based on a false perception of their win. But is trumping GOP elites a bad thing?
Perhaps yes because many are jumping to the alternative. And where will liberals go when the DINO/RINO party has fully consolidated?
From Gallup:
The same thing, every darn time. How do we fix that?
Legalize weed.
From same article:
“Democrats and independents who lean Democratic currently report giving the same level of thought to the election as they did in September 2012 (70%), whereas thought given is down slightly among Republicans and independents who lean Republican, from 81% to 75%. At the same time, intent to vote is down by a similar proportion among both party groups.”
That’s not so bad
Very off topic, but a little fun.
From “The Producers” — key lyric:
It ain’t no myst’ry
If it’s politics or hist’ry
The thing you gotta know is
Ev’rything is show biz
Heil myself
Watch my show
I’m the German Ethel Merman
Dontcha know
We are crossing borders
The new world order is here
Make a great big smile
Ev’ryone sieg heil to me
Wonderful me!
AND THE TERRIFIC FULL VERSION:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2lu0ef
Trump and the Republican Party benefit from the circulation of stories like this, because their readers get the real point. That point is that a legal system in which things like this are possible is a system that has failed, and, specifically, has failed in a ridiculous manner.
This is why the Trump inauguration parade will see Pennsylvania Ave lined with bankers’ heads on pikes.
Ah Capitalism, Trump style.
In the Clinton-Trump debate, HRC and Lester Holt rejected Trump’s call for stop-n-frisk as 1) ineffective and 2) unconstitutional. I accepted the HRC/Holt position as being accurate, but it is also conforms to my bias wrt to policing.
Today — FBI Director calls ‘stop and frisk’ an important tool when used right
Isn’t Comey the top federal law official? How can he even suggest a policy that is “unconstitutional” is an “important tool?” As “effectiveness” is often not a criteria for federal policies and actions, that part of his comment is more difficult to criticize, but it sure would be nice if that were changed.
So — guys, who’s correct Clinton or Comey?
The bulk of the videotaped testimony which Reuters reported on and was aggregated in the Yahoo News link you shared is found at the link:
https:/www.c-span.org/video?c4622429/comey-stop-and-frisk
As we can see, Comey’s testimony was inaccurately and incompletely reported.
Depends on the version of stop-and-frisk.
The practice used for decades, or the NYC version.