"Trump’s Campaign Spends 5 Times More on Rent Now That Donors Are Paying for It"

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by thermodynamic, Sep 4, 2016.

  1. thermodynamic Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #1
    http://fortune.com/2016/08/23/trump-campaign-rent/

    Headline says it all, but isn't this just another example of "supply and demand", nothing more, nothing less? Do the people who trumpet the theory now denounce it because Trump uses it no less than anyone else?
     
  2. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #2
    Clinton spends more of her donors money on rent than Trump, Trump donates more of his own money to the campaign than Hillary and it more than covers the rent. So what was the point of this article?
     
  3. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #3
    Trump tends not to pay his staff. Do he spends his own money that's just stupid.
     
  4. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #4
    But unlike Trump, Hillary doesn't own the buildings. Also, why did the rent go up? The campaign says it was to expand the campaign, but people question that when things look like this:

    image.jpeg image.jpeg
     
  5. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #5
    Ever paid rent in a downtown metro area? Trump can't cut himself breaks on the cost of renting it breaks campaign laws.
     
  6. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #6
    Sure. But the money goes back to him. Win/win. Sounds like campaign laws need to be reformed. Because this ends up being donors lining the pocket of the candidate. And aren't campaign laws supposed to guard against that?
     
  7. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #7
    Again he pays into his own campaign multiples the amount of the rent, and to say he is lining his pockets is a bit naive, he's employing people to maintain the buildings so that is keeping people in jobs, it's not like he comes to pick up rent on the 1st and puts it in his pocket.

    I think everyone forgets that Trump employs thousands of people long term.
     
  8. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #8
    I think you forget that renting office space out is a for profit enterprise.

    How much has he really sunk into his campaign that isn't going to be repaid in some way?
     
  9. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #9
    Millions.
     
  10. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #10
    Those images are from August 2015, well before even the first primaries.

    He is forbidden by law to provide the floor space for free. He has to charge himself under FEC rules fair market value for what is being provided, otherwise it would amount to an illegal corporate donation to his campaign. When he moves from a space on one floor to multiple floors, the rent necessarily has to go up.

    Mandatory reimbursements total about $6 million to Trump affiliated corporations. He has in total self-financed his campaign through $52 million in personal donations.
     
  11. MacAndMic macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2009
    #11
    I think the media is running out of things to complain about with Trump to deflect all of the negative Hillary is getting.

    Not that it's right, cost is cost and raising it 5x does throw a flag but this is politics and we all know, politics lines the pockets of the politicians while the people who gave the money are left scratching their heads. Remember Bernie buying a house out of his income range after he dropped out? Funny how things like that happen.
     
  12. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #12
    5x more in floor space should be because he has about 5x more people?
     
  13. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #13
    Who said five times more floor space? The article says five times more in rent, which is paid at fair market rate. The relationship is not linear.

    How much does it cost to rent multiple floors in midtown Manhattan? The $2 million he donates monthly I'd wager more than covers it.
     
  14. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #14
    The left complains about how Trump spends his own money, meanwhile they should be worried about who Hillary is getting in bed with to get hers. Hint: it's all the corporate/Wall Street interests that you guys wail about the rest of the year.
     
  15. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #15
    Why wouldn't it be linear? Let's do a hypothetical using low numbers to keep it simple. If you are paying $10 dollars per sq foot, and let's say you lease 2000 sq feet, that is $20,000 a month.

    Now it is said your cost has gone up 5x. Okay...$20,000 X 5 = $100,000.

    That should give you 10,000 square feet to work with. Five times the space. Five times the cost.

    Or, another option could be to maybe rent space elsewhere besides midtown Manhattan that would be cheaper for the campaign, making money go farther.

    Another thing to question is if the additional space is even being used. Per the article:

    Staff goes down, size and cost goes up? Why?
    --- Post Merged, Sep 4, 2016 ---
    I'm a different kind of liberal. I have no problem with ties to big money. Because I understand politics has always been a game of the rich, and probably always will be. Right from the start of this country. George Washington wasn't poor. https://www.history.org/Foundation/journal/winter13/washington.cfm
     
  16. APlotdevice, Sep 4, 2016
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2016

    APlotdevice macrumors 68040

    APlotdevice

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    #16
    Trump is one of the people Hillary has been in bed with. All Trump supporters are doing is cutting out the middle man, giving a corporate head direct say in what laws get passed. (A corporate head with serious mental issues who has shown he knows jack **** about how the US government actually works)
     
  17. samcraig macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    #17
    I think it might be hypocritical to call others naive.
     
  18. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #18
    I decided to check the FEC data myself and not rely on The Huffington Post. They are being extremely sly in their analysis. The implication from The Huffington Post and Forbes is that the rent increased suddenly from about $35,000 to about $169,000. What they are leaving out is the fact that this is not the case. The rent in fact increased gradually over the course of three months from $35,000 (April), to $72,000 (May), $110,000 (June), and then finally $169,000 (July). These increases coincide with Donald Trump becoming the presumptive nominee (May) and the eventual nominee (July) and are likely due to plans to expand from a primary-based campaign to a general campaign.

    Secondly, the number of "staff". The Huffington Post/Forbes is again using some trickery in its wording. The Forbes article that you quoted uses the word "employee" whereas the source at The Huffington Post uses the phrase "employees and consultants". When searching through the FEC data, payroll records list both campaign staff and consultants (employees of other companies, or companies themselves).

    In March The Huffington Post claims the number was between 190 and 200 (depends if you count organisations and individuals, as they are both listed under payroll). In July, the number on payroll was 177 by my analysis of the FEC filings (they list 171, likely because they're excluding organisations).

    The point is that these numbers bear no relation to the number of people physically working inside Trump Tower. The number is not the total number of employees working for the campaign in Trump Tower, as the Forbes article is implying. The number is the total number of employees and consultants, both individuals and organisations. Necessarily, many of these 'people' will not be inside Trump Tower. It is entirely true that this number decreased from between 190-200 to between 171-177. What is not true (because you cannot get that information from this data) is that fewer people were working inside Trump Tower.
     
  19. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #19
    But Trump Tower is where the office expense is right? So that confirms the increased cost/reduced headcount. Or are you saying that this cost also represents some sort of satellite office somewhere?
     
  20. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #20
    you don't raise rents by 5x without a ~5x increase in floor space. Rent is mostly about the square footage and office location - but he was already paying for the latter as the campaign hasn't moved.
    --- Post Merged, Sep 5, 2016 ---
    So has the numbers working increased by 4-5x? I.e to around a thousand?
     
  21. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #21
    No, rent is disbursed to Trump Tower but payroll is disbursed centrally to each employee or consultant. Payroll includes everybody working for the campaign committee, and that includes organisations such as web designers and banks to handle payment. These people are obviously not necessarily inside Trump Tower. Unfortunately you can't tell from the data whether somebody is an employee or a consultant, so we have no idea how many are actually at campaign HQ.

    If you just count people (as in not organisations) then the total was 132 in July and 70 in April. That's an increase no matter how you spin it, but I don't know what proportion of each are employees and consultants.
     
  22. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #22
    So an increase of approximately double. Therefore you'd expect rent to approximately double. Not to increase by a factor of five.
     
  23. thewitt macrumors 68020

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #23
    You guys really reach to try to pin anything on Trump that smells funny to you, while your gal-pal rapes the country with her over the top spending funded by both the super-rich when you all loathe publicly, and of course her huge foreign donors.

    Trump's campaign rental increased because his offices grew from one quarter of one floor to five fully occupied floors. He is still subsidizing a huge amount of this cost from his own pocket - which by the way he must also declare in his campaign funding documentation.

    Whether he pays himself, a PAC or super-doner pays, or his campaign pays, it's all accounted for.

    Soros has paid over $3M for several offices that Hillary's campaign uses as "satellite offices" which fall outside of her official reporting requirements. The people who "work" there are either volunteers or work for Soros, and though they are running phone banks and stuffing mailing for Hillary, they are off the official books.

    I'm sure Soros won't get any special treatment over this either...
     
  24. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #24
    I doubt rent is linear when you talk about large office areas in the middle of downtown NY.

    Hillary is outspending Donald either way so where is the outcry about her spending habits?

    Donald is donating more each month than Hillary has donated to her entire campaign and is easily covering this rent himself, outcry?

    Nothing?
     
  25. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #25
    Not sure why you'd expect it to be linear. I checked Clinton's campaign committee, too. Hers employs way more people but as the rent has gone up, the number of staff has changed bearing little relation. The law requires fair market value to be paid. I'm not an expert in real-estate but I'm willing to bet that renting a space on a single floor in midtown Manhattan costs a lot less than multiple floors. If somebody doesn't believe fair market value is being paid then go and submit an FEC complaint?

    But let's assume the worst case scenario as envisaged by The Huffington Post and some in this thread: that Mr. Trump is greedy and upped the rent so more of it went to his business. Mr. Trump makes a monthly donation of over $2 million to his committee. The rent would have to go up twelve-fold for him to break even.
     

Share This Page