Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Christine's avatar

Let's say, for the sake of example, that Trump purchased the building in NYC for 355 million in 2006 and that now in 2023/24 he went to his bank and said that he wanted a loan on the value of that building for 500 million which was its worth, fully occupied, which he was going to use to defray his expenses and expenditure, for the court fines made against him, in his recent trials, all which he lost and for Trump to remain open and trading, while trying to become the next American President, then to write off his financial losses and court rulings and financial costs accordingly, which he will do, with the power given him, as President - so slam dunk to Trump - aided and assisted by you who vote him in. Win/Win to Trump.

The bank provided Trump with the 500 million he asked for, at a respective loan repayment scheme of say 3% per annum, but during the repayments schedule, Trump defaulted, the bank grabbed his building and to recover their original investment of 500 million, they sold the property for 8.5 million, a 97% property value reduction, so now the bank is out of pocket for 491.5 million it can't recover or from Trump, who was only involved in the mortgage of that building with the bank - so what is the bank to do to recover the 491.5 million it is out of pocket for, or the interest on that money, which it has lost as well - and if more property parcels default, because the NYC property valuation has dropped 97% across the board by 2024, for loans made by that bank, or any bank, in the millions or trillions, how many more foreclosures does it take for that bank, or any bank, to go bust and take all of its customers down with it, irrespective of if they are wealthy or poor, this time, with an American government which spent all of its gold reserves last time this happened in 2018? and it does not have any gold reserves left now, in 2024.

While this is the scenario for that bank, the same argument could be made of all of the oher banks in America and around the world, where, if the value of commercial property occupancy, has plunged 97% and the banks can't recover the money they paid out in mortgages, for property now worth 3% of what it once was, at the new property occupancy valuation, based on occupancy which generates income the building needs to survive, which the banks did not do, to evaluate the actual real costs of a buildings occupied worth, because of market fluctuations and changes in the way that business is conducted - that impact felt by the customers of that bank, who wake up broke financially, where their bank's financial guarantee, is not covered by their government's investment holdings of gold, which it no longer has.

QED

Expand full comment
1 more comment...

No posts