The Inevitable New The Inevitable Trump Mocking Thread

Michael Moore Suggests The Democrat Who'd Crush Donald Trump, If She Were Old Enough
“She is the leader, everybody knows it, everybody feels it," the documentary filmmaker said.
By Lee Moran
02/02/2019 06:37 AM ET
|

Michael Moore lamented the constitutional rule that sets a minimum age of 35 for the president on Friday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “The Last Word.”

The documentary filmmaker said it was “too bad” because, otherwise, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) would have been able to throw her hat into the ring.

Moore appeared to suggest, in a roundabout way, that the freshman lawmaker could be one of the only Democrats who could not only beat President Donald Trump but also “crush” him in a presidential race.

“She is the leader, everybody knows it, everybody feels it, she’s the leader of this mass movement,” he said.
 
Again, dizzy was that kid that claimed all kinds of crazy things about his dad being in the FBI and was also an astronaut . . . and he is still doing it. Aka in non-PC terms he's a liar, with his head in the clouds.
If there’s one thing he’s showed us, it’s his active fantasy life.
 
Your domicile still cash flowing to the bank.
You don’t even want to know its jump in value over the last 12 months. What an asset!
Come sit with me and learn. I promise I won’t embarrass you. I will start slow. We will pretend you have money to invest.
 
Their on the banks balance sheet alright. Long enough to be packaged in to an MBS and sold to investors who put that MBS on their balance under anything resembling accounts recievable. Ring a bell Frienance? You must have missed messy’s avoidance of the following:

Return On Assets =

Net Income / Average Total Assets

Please tell me which “successful” company is not producing a return on their assets? I can think of at least 500 companies that produce a positive ROA. Geeze Frienance!

That you don't understand the difference between an assets and debt collateral is not surprising. "Investors" bought my house, did they?

Sure. So why are then letting me live in it when they could sell it for 3x the mortgage? That's a poor economic choice innit?

And I supposed the iPhones at the local Jeanious Bar are my assets, since I own some Apple bonds. Maybe I'll roll down there in a minute and pick up my "assets" and sell them.

You're really dumb. I'm not sure even Fries U. can help you.
 
Then you have Frienance saying:

“If you really think no successful company in the world owns assets that produce no income you're as dumb as the guys who thinks their house is on the bank's balance sheet... oh wait, that was you!”

There are at least 500 truly successful companies that have produced an ROA every year for decades. The Fortune 500 ring your cracked bell Frienance?

And every one of them own some assets that don't produce "cash flow."

But we've dance this around enough now and clearly you are simply too stupid to understand.

But lets make this interesting:

I will bet you 100 cases of Sculpin or your favorite Trappist brew that if we email any major American business accounting firm and ask if assets must produce "cash flow" to be considered an asset they will firmly and unequivocally say "no." We on? Or are you the coward?
 
And every one of them own some assets that don't produce "cash flow."

But we've dance this around enough now and clearly you are simply too stupid to understand.

But lets make this interesting:

I will bet you 100 cases of Sculpin or your favorite Trappist brew that if we email any major American business accounting firm and ask if assets must produce "cash flow" to be considered an asset they will firmly and unequivocally say "no." We on? Or are you the coward?
You have he coward distinction all to yourself.
Coward.
 
That you don't understand the difference between an assets and debt collateral is not surprising. "Investors" bought my house, did they?

Sure. So why are then letting me live in it when they could sell it for 3x the mortgage? That's a poor economic choice innit?

And I supposed the iPhones at the local Jeanious Bar are my assets, since I own some Apple bonds. Maybe I'll roll down there in a minute and pick up my "assets" and sell them.

You're really dumb. I'm not sure even Fries U. can help you.
Your uncle said the same thing about Fries U. providing anything but help. Kek!

Yup. Investors bought your collateralized debt (your house being the collateral) and packed it up all nice and neat into a jenga tower and sold it.


They're letting you live in it because you're paying them double digit interest every month, and either pay PMI, a VA funding fee, or made a 20% down payment to insure their asset, your collateralized debt. That's much more valuable than a speculated 3X mortgage in a rising interest rate environment. And it's not a poor econ choice but rather a smart finance choice. You're like a custodian for the banks money with the right incentives for you as well. But the bank is getting more of your dollars when it's worth more and less of it after 25 years when your dollar is worth less due to inflated prices. It's called inflation of the money supply which in turn inflates prices. The bank takes your monthly payments and immediately sells it to someone else. Cash is much more liquid than RE.

You could easily answer your I-phone and bond question if you noticed the cash flow direction. I don't recommend selling those bonds at the moment though. AAPL assets are still returning about 11%, equity is returning about 46%. Both good for your bonds and I-phone.

Questions?
 
And every one of them own some assets that don't produce "cash flow."

But we've dance this around enough now and clearly you are simply too stupid to understand.

But lets make this interesting:

I will bet you 100 cases of Sculpin or your favorite Trappist brew that if we email any major American business accounting firm and ask if assets must produce "cash flow" to be considered an asset they will firmly and unequivocally say "no." We on? Or are you the coward?
He will never bet anything. I have tried. 1. He’s stupid and he would lose every bet. 2. He’s broke and can’t afford to bet.
It’s super frustrating because he has nothing to lose as he spouts 100% incorrect info to his fans like Joe and others.
 
And every one of them own some assets that don't produce "cash flow."

But we've dance this around enough now and clearly you are simply too stupid to understand.

But lets make this interesting:

I will bet you 100 cases of Sculpin or your favorite Trappist brew that if we email any major American business accounting firm and ask if assets must produce "cash flow" to be considered an asset they will firmly and unequivocally say "no." We on? Or are you the coward?
We are on! But Sculpin sucks, especially the pineapple!! And you don't have to call them. Just look at their financial stats. I don't care what they say. I look at the financial reports that an "American business accounting firms produce." The only time they might "firmly and unequivocally say "no." is when there is fraud going on. You know, the whole Madoff, Bernanke, Paulson, Geithner, Enron, etc thing?
 
Your uncle said the same thing about Fries U. providing anything but help. Kek!

Yup. Investors bought your collateralized debt (your house being the collateral) and packed it up all nice and neat into a jenga tower and sold it.


They're letting you live in it because you're paying them double digit interest every month, and either pay PMI, a VA funding fee, or made a 20% down payment to insure their asset, your collateralized debt. That's much more valuable than a speculated 3X mortgage in a rising interest rate environment. And it's not a poor econ choice but rather a smart finance choice. You're like a custodian for the banks money with the right incentives for you as well. But the bank is getting more of your dollars when it's worth more and less of it after 25 years when your dollar is worth less due to inflated prices. It's called inflation of the money supply which in turn inflates prices. The bank takes your monthly payments and immediately sells it to someone else. Cash is much more liquid than RE.

You could easily answer your I-phone and bond question if you noticed the cash flow direction. I don't recommend selling those bonds at the moment though. AAPL assets are still returning about 11%, equity is returning about 46%. Both good for your bonds and I-phone.

Questions?
1. My mortgage payment is the same per month in 10 years, when my money is worth less. So the bank is getting less then and I am getting more. Understand? And my equity value over that time rises tremendously and my borrowed money was incredibly cheap. Understand? The bank hasn’t sold my mortgage. Understand?
Do you own any assets?
 
We are on! But Sculpin sucks, especially the pineapple!! And you don't have to call them. Just look at their financial stats. I don't care what they say. I look at the financial reports that an "American business accounting firms produce." The only time they might "firmly and unequivocally say "no." is when there is fraud going on. You know, the whole Madoff, Bernanke, Paulson, Geithner, Enron, etc thing?
“He doesn’t care what they say.” He didn’t take the bet after all. He’s scared. His absolute unwillingness to put his money where his mouth is, every single time, puts the lie to everything he says on here. Really ignorant know-it-all. Ignatius J. Reilly!
 
Back
Top