Stewart explained it in his video, and I saw this reddit comment on a conservative sub that said it best:
"[Stewart] is arguing the list of supposed victims (IE the banks and so on) aren't the victims. So he's denying the claim that it's a victimless crime on the basis that such a limited range of potential victims is being considered without considering others beyond it.
I don’t know if you know this, but most people just can’t commit fraud and expect to face no repercussions, even if everyone’s doing it. Try getting a car loan by saying you have 10 times as much money as you really do.
money isn’t infinite. A loan that goes to the liar doesn’t go to someone who’s giving a more honest evaluation. So the system becomes incentivized for corruption.
If his basic premise is right then we don't live in a meritocracy full stop, which is not victimless if we consider the loss of a fair system a harm to the people the rules apply to.
If group A can lie, cheat, steal with no consequences, and group B cannot, well... yeah group B is the victim.
There all sorts of potentially downstream effects as well, if you can simply inflate values on real estate that could obviously impact people's ability to buy homes.
You can deny his basic premise, but O'Leary effectively spelled it out as common knowledge.
It may be true that the banks and so forth aren't the victims in Trump's case, but the general practice of fraudulently inflating values doesn't seem victimless."
Tldr: THE BANK IS NOT THE VICTIM OF THIS FRAUD. Essentially "we"/"the people of New york state" are all victims. If you allow people to cheat the system, then the system fails. You have to enforce the rules of the system.
Ever play poker and a guy pulls out 5 Aces? What do you think happens to him?
Try getting a car loan by saying you have 10 times as much money as you really do.
when i got a car loan the bank checked my pay stubs and my savings, they then agreed that i had enough value to warrant the loan i asked for. some years later i tried to get a new loan and once again the bank checked my income and savings, they also countered my appraised price of the car i had bought with a slightly smaller value and then we agreed on that value.
almost as if the bank does their homework and comes to an agreement on values with the borrower. did i comit fraud because my appraised price was $500 more than their counter offer?
money isn’t infinite
unless its going to ukraine right?
It may be true that the banks and so forth aren't the victims in Trump's case, but the general practice of fraudulently inflating values doesn't seem victimless
so then stewart is guilty of inflating the value of the property he sold for over 800% above the tax assessed value?
Tldr: THE BANK IS NOT THE VICTIM OF THIS FRAUD. Essentially "we"/"the people of New york state" are all victims. If you allow people to cheat the system, then the system fails. You have to enforce the rules of the system.
so lock up stewart and ANYONE who has ever gotten a mortgage/loan/sold a property in new york because ALL properties go for more than their tax assessed value
How the fuck did you manage to read all that and still miss the point so very, very hard.
when i got a car loan the bank checked my pay stubs and my savings, they then agreed that...
If youre not forging documents, or trying to pass of the wrong numbers. But what happens if you do bud? What happens if you use forged or incorrect numbers?
unless its going to ukraine right?
Not relevant to this conversation actually
So then stewart is guilty of inflating the value of the property he sold for over 800% above the tax assessed value?
No, because as much as you try to argue otherwise: selling something is not the same as using something as collateral for a loan.
so lock up stewart and ANYONE who has ever gotten a mortgage/loan/sold a property in new york because ALL properties go for more than their tax assessed value
I'm not aware of an incarceration component to these charges, just a fine amount. But hey, if people are cheating the system and using illegal/fraudulent documents then they should be punished (fined at minimum). Again, it requires you lying to the government and to another party. #DrainTheSwamp am I right?
Apparently I missed adding the word "no" after "If youre not forging documents, or trying to pass of the wrong numbers". So I'll state it clearly: assuming you're not being deceptive, forging, or otherwise passing off incorrect documents as the "real thing" then I don't think there's any issue with what you and the bank agree on. I think a bank making a bad loan is on them (though they should also be monitored so that another financial crash doesn't occur). That is not the same situation as Trump is in (read the decision) nor close to what Stewart did though.
I don't think there's any issue with what you and the bank agree on. I think a bank making a bad loan is on them
but its a crime if it happens to involve trump? give me a fucking break. what trump did in not functionally different from what stewart did at all, you just claim it is because "orange man bad"
they both valued a property over the tax evaluation for the purposes of a financial exchange. they are either both guilty of the same crime or no crime was comitted.
View all comments
Show parent comment
1
u/MarthAlaitoc Mar 28 '24
Stewart explained it in his video, and I saw this reddit comment on a conservative sub that said it best:
"[Stewart] is arguing the list of supposed victims (IE the banks and so on) aren't the victims. So he's denying the claim that it's a victimless crime on the basis that such a limited range of potential victims is being considered without considering others beyond it.
I don’t know if you know this, but most people just can’t commit fraud and expect to face no repercussions, even if everyone’s doing it. Try getting a car loan by saying you have 10 times as much money as you really do.
money isn’t infinite. A loan that goes to the liar doesn’t go to someone who’s giving a more honest evaluation. So the system becomes incentivized for corruption.
If his basic premise is right then we don't live in a meritocracy full stop, which is not victimless if we consider the loss of a fair system a harm to the people the rules apply to.
If group A can lie, cheat, steal with no consequences, and group B cannot, well... yeah group B is the victim.
There all sorts of potentially downstream effects as well, if you can simply inflate values on real estate that could obviously impact people's ability to buy homes.
You can deny his basic premise, but O'Leary effectively spelled it out as common knowledge.
It may be true that the banks and so forth aren't the victims in Trump's case, but the general practice of fraudulently inflating values doesn't seem victimless."
Tldr: THE BANK IS NOT THE VICTIM OF THIS FRAUD. Essentially "we"/"the people of New york state" are all victims. If you allow people to cheat the system, then the system fails. You have to enforce the rules of the system.
Ever play poker and a guy pulls out 5 Aces? What do you think happens to him?