"When the U.S. economy fell into recession in 1990, Trump's highly leveraged business empire threatened to collapse. Entities of the Trump Organization, or Donald Trump personally, had incurred more than $5 billion in debt--$8.8 billion, according to one source--of which almost $1 billion had been drawn solely on Trump's personal guarantee. Big New York banks had financed $3.75 billion worth of debt. They reduced their risk and collected fees by syndicating the loans to some 70 other banks...Most of this money was recovered after subsequent restructurings, but some $600 million to $800 million may have been lost. Forbes magazine had estimated Trump's worth at $1.7 billion in 1989, making him the nation's 19th richest man. But two years later it assessed his worth at minus $900 million, making him a heavy contender in the world's poorest man category" [emphasis added].
The "Donald,' as he is affectionately called, is an interesting case, wildly productive at times, and a negative producer at others (at least if one takes into balance the sucking out of capital to "resuscitate" his business enterprises, at the expense of other potential borrowers), much like the Real Estate market he speculates in. No surprise there, since we Georgists know that the true cause of economic busts is when Rent has been pushed beyond what labor and capital can pay, leading to a collapse and a stoppage of production"eventually. Of course, unlike the average foreclosed-upon homeowner, the Donald has rich creditors all over the world to fall back upon. Or, perhaps it is like that old saying: when you owe a bank a hundred thousand dollars, it is your creditor, when you owe them a billion, it is your partner. I won't go further than that because Trump also engages in another zero-sum game suing people he disagrees with. Make no mistake, however, I do want him to continue the productive business of erecting buildings! Moving on"
We need something more, someone who subtracted even more substantially from the commonwealth pot, even beyond being a active but unwitting pawn in what the fickle market removed. We need someone who labored hard, apparently, but who ultimately destroyed both capital and jobs (other people's ability to labor).
Well, we can start by looking at some of the top candidates for worst CEO of all time from CNBC.COM (http://www.cnbc.com/id/30502091/):
Vikram Pandit - Citigroup
Pandit
didn't create the mess Citi is in, but"when Pandit took over, Citi was already
on track to report write-downs and increased credit costs of $20 billion.
Today, the banking supermarket is propped up by $45 billion in bailouts and is,
in effect, owned by the U.S. government.
THE STAT: Although Pandit's currently earning $1 a year, his pay package was
valued at $38.2 million for 2008, a year when taxpayers kept the firm in
business.
Carly Fiorina Hewlett-Packard
A
consummate self-promoter, Fiorina was busy pontificating on the lecture circuit
and posing for magazine covers while her company floundered. She paid herself
handsome bonuses and perks while laying off thousands of employees to cut
costs. The merger Fiorina orchestrated with Compaq in 2002 was widely seen as a
failure. She was ousted in 2005.
THE STAT: HP stock lost half its value during Fiorina's tenure.
Stanley O'Neal Merrill Lynch
Stanley
O'Neal's abrasive personality and ruthless cost cutting earned him many
enemies, but his push toward riskier bets and subprime exposure led to his
ouster. After Merrill posted the biggest quarterly loss in its 93-year
history--and O'Neal was caught approaching Wachovia about a merger without the
board's approval--he was finally fired.
THE STAT: O'Neal walked out the door with $161.5 million in severance.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
5
5
5
