Trump Casinos got ($25 Million) Break on Tax Bill under Christie

dave23 said:

Robert_Casotto said:

the same NYT whose majority shareholder is a top foreign donor to [Hillary] Clinton Foundation?

Yes, that one. 

Not exactly. Carlos Slim (if the reference was to him) is the largest individual shareholder, at about 17 percent. Somewhat shy of a majority.

DaveSchmidt said:

dave23 said:

Robert_Casotto said:

the same NYT whose majority shareholder is a top foreign donor to [Hillary] Clinton Foundation?

Yes, that one. 

Not exactly. Carlos Slim (if the reference was to him) is the largest individual shareholder, at about 17 percent. Somewhat shy of a majority.

Also, Slim's stock is class A shares which severely limits control of the company. Class A shares only control 1/3 of the directorate. 

The class B shares controls 2/3 of the directorate. The Sulzberger family trust owns 88% of the class B stock.

I'm sure the Sulzbergers and NYT IR couldn't care less what Slim and his 17% Class As and his five out of 14 directors think.  In fact, they'd probably be happy for him to dump his 17% on the market.  Same way they don't care what Fairpointe Capital, Blackrock, Contrarius or Vanguard think.  

Robert_Casotto said:

I'm sure the Sulzbergers and NYT IR couldn't care less what Slim and his 17% Class As and his five out of 14 directors think.  In fact, they'd probably be happy for him to dump his 17% on the market.  Same way they don't care what Fairpointe Capital, Blackrock, Contrarius or Vanguard think.  

Funny math that gets you to "majority." Some of us went to better schools than others, so I'm not blaming you.

I still don't know how any of that is relevant to whether this story is a) true or b) meaningful.

I wish people would argue their points directly instead of trying to divert to some other tangent.

ml1 said:

I still don't know how any of that is relevant to whether this story is a) true or b) meaningful.

I wish people would argue their points directly instead of trying to divert to some other tangent.

Consider the "trying to divert to some other tangent" as conceding the truth of the original assertion.

you attorneys always want to impeach the source instead of argue on the merits

nohero said:

ml1 said:

I still don't know how any of that is relevant to whether this story is a) true or b) meaningful.

I wish people would argue their points directly instead of trying to divert to some other tangent.

Consider the "trying to divert to some other tangent" as conceding the truth of the original assertion.

" ‘If the law is against you, talk about the evidence,’ said a battered barrister. ‘If the evidence is against you, talk about the law, and, since you ask me, if the law and the evidence are both against you, then pound on the table and yell like hell.’ " - Carl Sandburg

ml1 said:

you attorneys always want to impeach the source instead of argue on the merits " src="/res/static/common/plugins/redactor/emoticons/1.0/images/3.gif" unselectable="on">

nohero said:

ml1 said:

I still don't know how any of that is relevant to whether this story is a) true or b) meaningful.

I wish people would argue their points directly instead of trying to divert to some other tangent.

Consider the "trying to divert to some other tangent" as conceding the truth of the original assertion.

dave23 said:

Robert_Casotto said:

I'm sure the Sulzbergers and NYT IR couldn't care less what Slim and his 17% Class As and his five out of 14 directors think.  In fact, they'd probably be happy for him to dump his 17% on the market.  Same way they don't care what Fairpointe Capital, Blackrock, Contrarius or Vanguard think.  

Funny math that gets you to "majority." Some of us went to better schools than others, so I'm not blaming you.

That funny math elected Bill Clinton President.  Twice.  

wait -- Bill Clinton didn't get a majority of the Electoral College?  Finally, a real  Clinton scandal!

Robert_Casotto said:

dave23 said:

Robert_Casotto said:

I'm sure the Sulzbergers and NYT IR couldn't care less what Slim and his 17% Class As and his five out of 14 directors think.  In fact, they'd probably be happy for him to dump his 17% on the market.  Same way they don't care what Fairpointe Capital, Blackrock, Contrarius or Vanguard think.  

Funny math that gets you to "majority." Some of us went to better schools than others, so I'm not blaming you.

That funny math elected Bill Clinton President.  Twice.  

Robert_Casotto said:

dave23 said:

Robert_Casotto said:

I'm sure the Sulzbergers and NYT IR couldn't care less what Slim and his 17% Class As and his five out of 14 directors think.  In fact, they'd probably be happy for him to dump his 17% on the market.  Same way they don't care what Fairpointe Capital, Blackrock, Contrarius or Vanguard think.  

Funny math that gets you to "majority." Some of us went to better schools than others, so I'm not blaming you.

That funny math elected Bill Clinton President.  Twice.  

He won with a plurality of the popular vote, not a majority. Twice.

dave23 said:

Robert_Casotto said:

That funny math elected Bill Clinton President.  Twice.  

He won with a plurality of the popular vote, not a majority. Twice.

To continue the thread drift: Since 1824, when the popular vote was first fully recorded, funny math has decided one in every three* presidential elections.

*That's 33 percent**

**Not a majority

Which all goes to prove that Trump pays his taxes and Chris Christie is awesome, I guess.

dave23 said:

Robert_Casotto said:

that the same Gawker who filed for bankruptcy protection to avoid honoring a judgment awarded for posting a video of a guy having sex and then agreed to sell their assets  to Univision, the entity who Trump sued for $500mm for not honoring a contract they had with one of his businesses?

Of all the possible responses, that's the last one I expected.

Really, you wouldn't have expected that from him?

DaveSchmidt said:

dave23 said:

Robert_Casotto said:

That funny math elected Bill Clinton President.  Twice.  

He won with a plurality of the popular vote, not a majority. Twice.

To continue the thread drift: Since 1824, when the popular vote was first fully recorded, funny math has decided one in every three* presidential elections.


*That's 33 percent**

**Not a majority

What's "funny" about the math? It's "first past the post" which I believe is the British racing analogy to elections.

The horse that wins doesn't have to beat the horse that comes in second by one-half the length of the track.