CSotD: Greed, lust and whathaveyou
Skip to comments
This Ann Telnaes panel coincides with a fascinating report last night on "All Things Considered" that made me really miss the business beat.
Ann is correct that the Trump Family Industries are benefiting from Papa Schtrumpf being in the White House, not surprising since he ran for office to swell his personal prestige, rather than out of some urge to serve the nation, except in the Twilight Zone interpretation of the phrase.
As she suggests, it's all tricks and damn few treats for us.
But leasing the White House is not an across the board advantage, particularly in the real-estate development business, a pretty big chunk of both Trump and Kushner holdings.
The report on NPR was about a Kushner attempt to profit from an aptly-numbered building on Fifth Avenue, and as the tale unwound, my Spidey senses began to tingle.
Then came the great HA-HA! when they told how a major Chinese company backed off a nine-figure investment in the project because, even with Jared Kushner technically divested, anything his family does attracts reporters.
As host Kelly McEvers summed it up, "In other words, when you're in the White House, your business is going to get a lot more scrutiny, which can scare away investors and customers."
The whole report is worth your time because commercial real estate development is incredibly secretive and we don't get to peek under the covers very often.
Example: A company I covered was planning to build a mall with a Costco store as its anchor. At the same time, a rival company was slightly ahead on plans to build a strip mall.
The Costco guy flies up, steps off the plane and greets the developer with "Is it true that XYZ company is bringing in a Sam's Club?"
"Yes."
Costco guy spins on his heels and gets back on the plane. He'd apparently bought a round-trip ticket and was only planning to stay if the answer had been favorable.
Business development information is so delicate that a mall manager lost his job when I asked him about a set of blueprints I'd … found … and he said it was too early to comment. That was too much information.
Reporting Hint: I used to attend Chamber functions, but most of what you got there was spin and bullshit. The real tips came at the Home Builders Association meetings, because the contractors knew who was blowing hot air and who was actually about to stick some shovels in the soil.
They also had funnier stories, like the evening a bunch of them began swapping tales about a prominent "wealth management" adviser who was building a new office and had named her boyfriend general contractor.
He didn't know, for instance, that there were left-opening and right-opening doors. He thought you just flipped them upside down to get the desired effect.
I miss those days.
But if Ann Telnaes got me jumping like a retired fire-horse hearing the bells, this Steve Breen cartoon sure brings me back to earth.
I think I'm more depressed by these revelations than all the stories of out-and-out predatory bastards. It's not simply that "I thought he was one of the good guys," but his wife's genial acceptance brings back my utter bewilderment about couples who would go to Las Vegas and attend the topless show girl extravaganzas together.
I never understood how a wife could sit next to her husband at one of those things, and I find the airy "boys will be boys" dismissal of crude behavior baffling.
I'm not sure where to draw the line — maybe it's okay to tolerate a Playboy subscription, but, jumping jesus on a pogo stick, you don't have to sit down and read it with him, nor do you have to go to girlie shows with him.
Nor do you have to stand by while he's goosing young girls and making dirty jokes to them, rolling your eyes and treating it as if it were cute or inevitable.
I'm not simply blaming the wives. I'm genuinely baffled by the whole relationship.
And it's not like it's just the old folks: If women no longer smile, roll their eyes and dismiss it, it's still a source of humor, and note who comes off as the bitch in this popular meme.
As for GHWB, maybe the #MeToo thing is working, and maybe, alongside the genuinely criminal cases, we'll see more of these disappointing revelations, as well as thoughtful responses and maybe some genuine dialogue in place of weary acceptance or pointless hostility.
Promise: I won't ask why anyone wears low-cut dresses if you don't demand to know why guys look down them.
But we all know that there are rules, dammit:
Even a clueless, gormless schlub like George Costanza, who can't help but stare, would know that you're not supposed to comment and you're certainly not allowed to touch.
WTF is wrong with guys like GHWB?
That's a genuine question. Even guys in my generation, who grew up with the Playboy Philosophy that, whatever else it promoted, emphasized being cool, remained totally uncool.
It didn't help that James Bond, the epitome of cool, was uncool when it came to keeping his hands to himself and obtaining consent and suchlike.
Too bad that secret slide-out drawer in the briefcase Q gave him, instead of containing a row of gold doubloons or whatever the hell they were, had held a row of condoms.
Trust me, James, if you'd had the decency to ask, you'd have still gotten to use them.
Speaking of gormless …
Harry Bliss brings to mind a poem on this topic that I wrote in eighth grade. We'd been studying Richard Lovelace in English class, and I'd been reading John Lennon and Jack Douglas on my own.
A heady combination.
There were three or four verses, redolent with bathos, but I can only remember the first:
O Maiden Fair, t'were cruelly done
To bid me wait whilst off thou run,
Pledging return – O wicked lie!
Why wouldst fair maid
So hurt a guy?
Comments 3
Comments are closed.