Jump to content

Romney kids trust fund


shalab

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Those Romney boys are getting a disservice.  I see them and think "born on third base, think they hit a triple".

 

Let young people find their own way.  Give them a lift when they are 40+ saddled with career stress, kids education savings, and retirement planning stress.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ValueCarl

MINT Romney is a better name for him. "LEVER UP!" Side note: Yes, Apple's a cash king and a great company having managed to steal the ball from network owners facilitating the delivery of goods and services being bought under their brand, but I am starting to wonder if it hasn't become a MORMON PONZI SCHEME. For some reason, the few Mormons I know excluding the young ones they have travelling around communities on bicycles with clean white shirts and ties selling soul comforting news on salvation, have continued to express Apple as the magic elixir in their portfolios.

 

I think MINT is a used car salesman, but WTHDIK since having morphed into a DUMMYCRAT for well thought out selfish purposes.         

 

 

 

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2012/02/mitt-romney-201202

 

Romney’s phrase, “leverage up,” provides the key to understanding this most profitable stage of his business career. While putting relatively little money on the table, Bain could strike a deal using largely debt. That generally meant that the company being acquired had to borrow huge sums. But there was no guarantee that target companies would be able to repay their debts. At Bain, the goal was to buy businesses that were stagnating as subsidiaries of large corporations and grow them or shake them up to burnish their performance. Because many of the companies were troubled, or at least were going to be heavily indebted after Bain bought them, their bonds would be considered lower-grade, or “junk.” That meant they would have to pay higher interest on the bonds, like a strapped credit-card holder facing a higher rate than a person who pays off purchases more quickly. High-yielding junk bonds were appealing to investors willing to take on risk in exchange for big payouts. But they also represented a big bet: if the companies didn’t generate large profits or could not sell their stock to the public, some would be crippled by the debt layered on them by the buyout firms. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Mitt doesn't win, at least he can use his millions to be the first private capital to fund president Gingrich's moon base.

 

I thinked that's called a win-win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest misterstockwell

Why is this considered a negative? I gift the max to my kids every year now. I waited to see how they grew up. They are in their teens now and they turned out great. They work their asses off in school and sports. They lead their classes. They don't ask for anything. Happy. I love my kids and smile when I see what they have beccome. I expect they will get scholarships for college, and the money is there if it's not enough. They can use what is left after they graduate. I am certain they will use it wisely. How do you know Romney's kids are any different? I would give the guy props for a job well done. That article is idiotic. "He could have done this..." or "he might have done that...." Speculation. Pure and simple BS. You don't need to manipulate the tax code to make money, unless your Obama Inc and need to soak people to fund your crazy socialist spending habits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is this considered a negative?

 

They won't ever know the feeling of making it on their own.  They are good in sports -- do you give them points to help them win?

 

The Republican's like to point out that welfare creates a social problem where people stop working or lose initiative.  Family welfare is different?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Family welfare is similar but it depends on the situation.  If the family raises the kids as middle class then the resources will be used to help them achieve a level of education for the new world.  I think you should comment on the specifics if you have the info as your argument is just as silly as saying everyone who is on public assistance is getting a handout versus short term assistance.  BTW Obama appears to be living a lifestyle as lavious if not more than Romney (with shopping trips to Spain and all).

 

Packer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest misterstockwell

Why is this considered a negative?

 

They won't ever know the feeling of making it on their own.  They are good in sports -- do you give them points to help them win?

 

The Republican's like to point out that welfare creates a social problem where people stop working or lose initiative.  Family welfare is different?

 

That is ridiculous and offensive. You assume they are sloths who don't know how to work and are spoonfed. You couldn't be more wrong. They are driven. Some people have a work ethic, some don't. My son will work till exhaustion for my projects with never a complaint, and he doesn't get paid directly. He just does it. That's they way he is. If you want to call it "family welfare", so be it, but it's not taking from the rich and giving to the poor just because they are poor, with no effort on the part of the poor(other than to put out their hands). That's the Obama way. That's not my way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest misterstockwell

I expect they will get scholarships for college, and the money is there if it's not enough.

 

Curious how you did it. My understanding is that the colleges look at the net worth of parents before awarding the scholarship.

 

Did you create a trust and does the money grow tax free?

 

They won't get scholarships for need. They are both excellent students, and one has crazy good musical talent.

 

No trusts, and their funds pay tax like any other. My way of investing generates very little in the way of taxes if it all works right. I don't mind paying capital gains at some point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest misterstockwell

Want more examples? I have three nieces/nephew who got about $15,000 when they were younger. I invested it for them, and they all ended up with over $300,000 each. They always knew how to work. One went to college on a full ride for sports. She got married and used her money to buy a house. She works like a dog with her sister, who didn't go to college, but also used her money to buy a house AND a condo. She has since worked hard enough to replace all the funds she used. The brother did the same, buying a house, continue to work long days and making his own way. Good kids do the right thing when you give them their welfare payments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is this considered a negative?

 

They won't ever know the feeling of making it on their own.  They are good in sports -- do you give them points to help them win?

 

The Republican's like to point out that welfare creates a social problem where people stop working or lose initiative.  Family welfare is different?

 

That is ridiculous and offensive. You assume they are sloths who don't know how to work and are spoonfed. You couldn't be more wrong. They are driven. Some people have a work ethic, some don't. My son will work till exhaustion for my projects with never a complaint, and he doesn't get paid directly. He just does it. That's they way he is. If you want to call it "family welfare", so be it, but it's not taking from the rich and giving to the poor just because they are poor, with no effort on the part of the poor(other than to put out their hands). That's the Obama way. That's not my way.

 

I don't assume they are sloths, I take your word for it that they are hard working and able to earn their own rewards.  Not yours, but theirs.

 

We have different viewpoints on the relationship between the parent and the adult child.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I side with Misterstockwell on this.

 

I personally know someone very well who was given a trust fund at birth and has still accomplished more than 99% of his friends.  He graduate college with honors, was a state champion athlete in highschool, and landed an excellent job at a major investment company.  His family built their wealth as scientists and he had NO help finding his career.  The money he inherited did nothing, to accumulate money on his own he held a job every summer during college.  He had no 'need' to do any of that.  Instilling your kids with a sense of pride and purpose has much more to do with their motivation in life than gifted money.

 

I can give countless examples of people my age that are very unmotivated and were given nothing.  I think you will find a very weak correlation between gifted money and life accomplishments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most trusts do more harm than good. They prevent the student from qualifying & applying for student loans, they break the link between the need to simultaneously study & work to pay for next semester, they remove the consequence of good/bad decisions, & the student never learns how to deal with overwhelming debt. The harm noticably worsens when the student also lives at home while attending school.

 

Back in the day, you & the rodents shared a dive with 3-4 others, you went to class during the day, you typically worked 1-2 nights as well as a Saterday/Sunday, & you embraced life - how to cook, & the need for cleanliness! Low pay, long hours, low status - the same as most others have to do, every day, & economics ruled your life. You tried different things out of neccessity, & if you failed - the guy working next to you was what you might otherwise become. The spoiled & the bratty failed miserably, the natural leaders rose on their own merits.

 

Why move out if mom/dad let you live in a nice place with free room & board, & throw in a car to use? Why work terribly hard if the trust is paying your books, tuition, & holiday breaks? - living at home what expenses do you really have? Cut the apron strings.

 

Nothing wrong with trust funds, just make sure that you know if it is really about you or them?

 

SD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing wrong with trust funds, just make sure that you know if it is really about you or them?

 

Too right.

 

My parents paid for my college education and gave me a meager allowance so that I could study and not work.  Pretty cushy.

 

I graduated.  I was no longer a child.  The allowance stopped cold.

 

I was maybe born on second base.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Why move out if mom/dad let you live in a nice place with free room & board, & throw in a car to use? Why work terribly hard if the trust is paying your books, tuition, & holiday breaks?

 

 

Maybe because you want a sense of self worth and accomplishment in life.  There are plenty of ways to instill that into a kid, the individual I mentioned was encouraged to hold summer jobs since he was 16 - He learned who he idolized and who he did not want to be.  Even if your parents would give you free room and board I don't know many people who would take it - moving away from home has huge appeal at 18.

 

I think there is a difference between irresponsible pampering and a trust fund...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My wife's two brothers are still getting an allowance from Mommy, and they are in their 40s.

 

Last summer there was a family meeting over at our house (my wife and her 3 siblings) to discuss long term options for her mother who is 81.  The topic came up that she might not have enough money left to fund her long term care.  She asked her brothers if they would be willing to pay their own way and they got really defensive.  It's very emasculating for them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...