First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
Post Reply What's the stupidest thing you used to believe wholeheartedly?
48882 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / F / New Jersey, USA
Offline
Posted 8/11/17

DrunkKanti wrote:

Dreams only come true for those that work to make their dreams come true. You can't just sit on your hands all day, hoping someone will hand you everything you want.


True until life says "fuck that and you".

I still have dreams but they're slowly dying and it scares me a lot. I try to cling on to some small hope that things will get better in the long run. But damn is it hard.
8512 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / a pop tart
Offline
Posted 8/11/17
Potentsaliva wrote:


That I could be whatever I wanted to be.

I wanted to be Thomas the Tank Engine, but that shits never gonna happen


You, you know my pain.
1998 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Sacramento, CA
Offline
Posted 8/11/17

qualeshia3 wrote:
I still have dreams but they're slowly dying and it scares me a lot. I try to cling on to some small hope that things will get better in the long run. But damn is it hard.

You're young. You still have plenty of time left to keep working toward your dreams. If you don't think you're good enough or talented enough to achieve your dreams, practice and hone the skills necessary to achieve them. Your dreams only die when you stop working toward them.
48882 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / F / New Jersey, USA
Offline
Posted 8/11/17

DrunkKanti wrote:


qualeshia3 wrote:
I still have dreams but they're slowly dying and it scares me a lot. I try to cling on to some small hope that things will get better in the long run. But damn is it hard.

You're young. You still have plenty of time left to keep working toward your dreams. If you don't think you're good enough or talented enough to achieve your dreams, practice and hone the skills necessary to achieve them. Your dreams only die when you stop working toward them.


Thanks for the help.
643 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / M / England, Norfolk,...
Offline
Posted 8/11/17
I agree with most of what you have to day although I still think schools should include some small course of sorts to atleast teach the basics of life. This could be after students have finished highschool or could be during highschool, it would be run by the government and mandatory to attend (perfect world scenario here). Also, the point I was vaguely trying to making (but didn't) is that certain subjects are somewhat useless to me, and will not help me to go on to further education, nor will I think they will be of any use to me in the near future. I can understand not that maths is actually pretty damn useful for the average person, as well as English (Perhaps the basics such as calculating percentages, basic level addition, subtraction and division and calcualting Interest) but subjects like science, I don't think will help people in situations that will inevitabley occur in life.

Also, I think students should be able to choose most of their subjects (Maths and English remain mandatory) to better suit their "dreams and aspirations" (kinda cheesy I know) I plan (plan) on becoming a historian of sorts, or something similar in life, so I would rather have ditched science for additional education within history (perfect world scenario). Well, point kinda made, thank you for the advice.
Posted 8/11/17
That The Jerry Springer and Maury shows were real.

...they're not right?
923 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M
Offline
Posted 8/12/17 , edited 8/12/17

ronchester44 wrote:

I agree with most of what you have to day although I still think schools should include some small course of sorts to atleast teach the basics of life. This could be after students have finished highschool or could be during highschool, it would be run by the government and mandatory to attend (perfect world scenario here). Also, the point I was vaguely trying to making (but didn't) is that certain subjects are somewhat useless to me, and will not help me to go on to further education, nor will I think they will be of any use to me in the near future. I can understand not that maths is actually pretty damn useful for the average person, as well as English (Perhaps the basics such as calculating percentages, basic level addition, subtraction and division and calcualting Interest) but subjects like science, I don't think will help people in situations that will inevitabley occur in life.

Also, I think students should be able to choose most of their subjects (Maths and English remain mandatory) to better suit their "dreams and aspirations" (kinda cheesy I know) I plan (plan) on becoming a historian of sorts, or something similar in life, so I would rather have ditched science for additional education within history (perfect world scenario). Well, point kinda made, thank you for the advice.


I can think a few situations in daily life where knowing basic science will help you:
evaluating advertising claims for health products,
understanding nutritional labels,
asking your doctor questions about treatment alternatives for illnesses,
troubleshooting household appliances, and
understanding how cleaning products in the bathroom, kitchen, and laundry work.

You won't be young and healthy forever, so some of those situations will come up relatively often as the years go by. Maybe you'll also be able to avoid a few scams and get-rich-quick schemes.
4088 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Wherever
Offline
Posted 8/12/17
Girls could get pregnant through anal.

I was a dumbass, dont laugh at me.
467 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M
Offline
Posted 8/12/17 , edited 8/12/17
I grew up as a Democrat. My mom, my dad, my entire family, and friends.

99% of people around me were all liberals.

But the smartest man I know was my grandpa who was a physicist. He always part so much wisdom. He told me that any of your strongly held beliefs that I should always look for disconfirming evidence against it. I never knew what he meant until I started questioning why the media was attacking Trump.

I couldn't believe the truth when I did my own research of how bias the media was against one man. I went down a deep dark hole in my research for the truth.

Overall, I'm glad I took the red-pill. I'm a better person for it.

643 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / M / England, Norfolk,...
Offline
Posted 8/12/17

mittemeyer wrote:


ronchester44 wrote:

I agree with most of what you have to day although I still think schools should include some small course of sorts to atleast teach the basics of life. This could be after students have finished highschool or could be during highschool, it would be run by the government and mandatory to attend (perfect world scenario here). Also, the point I was vaguely trying to making (but didn't) is that certain subjects are somewhat useless to me, and will not help me to go on to further education, nor will I think they will be of any use to me in the near future. I can understand not that maths is actually pretty damn useful for the average person, as well as English (Perhaps the basics such as calculating percentages, basic level addition, subtraction and division and calcualting Interest) but subjects like science, I don't think will help people in situations that will inevitabley occur in life.

Also, I think students should be able to choose most of their subjects (Maths and English remain mandatory) to better suit their "dreams and aspirations" (kinda cheesy I know) I plan (plan) on becoming a historian of sorts, or something similar in life, so I would rather have ditched science for additional education within history (perfect world scenario). Well, point kinda made, thank you for the advice.


I can think a few situations in daily life where knowing basic science will help you:
evaluating advertising claims for health products,
understanding nutritional labels,
asking your doctor questions about treatment alternatives for illnesses,
troubleshooting household appliances, and
understanding how cleaning products in the bathroom, kitchen, and laundry work.

You won't be young and healthy forever, so some of those situations will come up relatively often as the years go by. Maybe you'll also be able to avoid a few scams and get-rich-quick schemes.


Eh, I didn't really learn that much in High school that would've helped me in those proposed situations. Furthermore, avoiding scams doesn't require an understanding of science, just common sense and intelligence. Most of what I know regarding health and fitness stemmed from my education in Home economics, and the rest of it from certain YouTubers I watch (Vegan gains).
923 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M
Offline
Posted 8/12/17 , edited 8/12/17


Well, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but this is what I think.

Media outlets do tend to publish stories that fit pre-existing narratives, but it's useful to understand how these narratives come to exist. In Donald Trump's case, it's because during the 2016 campaign, he regularly misspoke on factual issues and promoted xenophobic policy, which both the Democratic and Republican establishment vociferously denied or distanced themselves from during the election cycle. But that is not why he is so disliked. Trump plays up his outsider status, in order to tell his base that the same standards that other politicians are held to somehow don't apply to him. When the news media corrects him for saying something untrue, he says "fake news" and then says something even more outrageous that he probably knows is also untrue, since he's done this so many times it's a pattern now.

As a businessman, he has declared bankruptcy several times--most of his wealth comes from branding his name, which he promoted successfully through his reality television show The Apprentice. He has a certain populist charisma and brilliant instincts when it comes to self-promotion. But the man has a streak of unethical behavior--his charity has been investigated for self-dealing, his Trump University was the target of a class action lawsuit. and his friends have told the press that he lies to acquaintances just for practice. His biographer who ghost-wrote The Art of the Deal has reported being shortchanged for his work, and that Trump has no intellectual curiosity and no attention span. White House leaks claim that, for reading work related briefs and memos, Trump has an attention span for about half a page, and that the way to keep his attention after that is to mention his name regularly and hope he keeps reading out of a desire to know what people think of him. If people who psychologically profile celebrities for a living are to be believed, Trump is a classic narcissist.

I'm not an expert, but I do spend time reading the news published by both the left and the right, and (imo) Donald Trump is one of the most unqualified men to have ever been President because he is fundamentally an indecent, vengeful man without the capacity for self-reflection that men charged with great social responsibility must have. His own staff has said that he doesn't coordinate with them, leading to frequent contradictions in the press about what the stance of his administration is on a given issue. I'll admit this isn't that big a deal, compared to Trump's total lack of understanding of public policy. On health care and the economy, he knows about as much as the average person on the street, but even that does not disqualify him from being a great president, since consequential presidents such as FDR and Reagan were both light on policy details but left behind lasting presidential legacies. No, what really concerns me about Trump are his Twitter feuds and his demonstrated managerial incompetence, which show he does not have the temperament or the ability to be the public face and head of the United States government.

But of course, that is just my opinion.
12 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / Heck
Offline
Posted 8/12/17
I used to believe that Crunchyroll was just a website to stream anime

Now I know it's a strange, wonderful place with a rich dichotomy of opinion

and also anime

d o p e
30707 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 8/12/17
I used to believe people deep down were not all potential monsters.
I also used to be more right leaning i guess in the past i would of sided with Trump if i was American (lucky i'm not) glad i grew up out of the bullshit.
467 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M
Offline
Posted 8/12/17

mittemeyer wrote:



Well, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but this is what I think.

Media outlets do tend to publish stories that fit pre-existing narratives, but it's useful to understand how these narratives come to exist. In Donald Trump's case, it's because during the 2016 campaign, he regularly misspoke on factual issues and promoted xenophobic policy, which both the Democratic and Republican establishment vociferously denied or distanced themselves from during the election cycle. But that is not why he is so disliked. Trump plays up his outsider status, in order to tell his base that the same standards that other politicians are held to somehow don't apply to him. When the news media corrects him for saying something untrue, he says "fake news" and then says something even more outrageous that he probably knows is also untrue, since he's done this so many times it's a pattern now.

As a businessman, he has declared bankruptcy several times--most of his wealth comes from branding his name, which he promoted successfully through his reality television show The Apprentice. He has a certain populist charisma and brilliant instincts when it comes to self-promotion. But the man has a streak of unethical behavior--his charity has been investigated for self-dealing, his Trump University was the target of a class action lawsuit. and his friends have told the press that he lies to acquaintances just for practice. His biographer who ghost-wrote The Art of the Deal has reported being shortchanged for his work, and that Trump has no intellectual curiosity and no attention span. White House leaks claim that, for reading work related briefs and memos, Trump has an attention span for about half a page, and that the way to keep his attention after that is to mention his name regularly and hope he keeps reading out of a desire to know what people think of him. If people who psychologically profile celebrities for a living are to be believed, Trump is a classic narcissist.

I'm not an expert, but I do spend time reading the news published by both the left and the right, and (imo) Donald Trump is one of the most unqualified men to have ever been President because he is fundamentally an indecent, vengeful man without the capacity for self-reflection that men charged with great social responsibility must have. His own staff has said that he doesn't coordinate with them, leading to frequent contradictions in the press about what the stance of his administration is on a given issue. I'll admit this isn't that big a deal, compared to Trump's total lack of understanding of public policy. On health care and the economy, he knows about as much as the average person on the street, but even that does not disqualify him from being a great president, since consequential presidents such as FDR and Reagan were both light on policy details but left behind lasting presidential legacies. No, what really concerns me about Trump are his Twitter feuds and his demonstrated managerial incompetence, which show he does not have the temperament or the ability to be the public face and head of the United States government.

But of course, that is just my opinion.


Many people hire ghost writers to write their books. A lot of James Patterson fans are about 99% sure that most of his books are ghost written. Regardless, even if the ghost writer did the write the book. Trump had to give him which the specific ideas to write about.

As far as how Donald accumulated wealth, you mention branding? People have a misconception of branding. In order for a brand to be successful, the product or service must be superior for consumers to buy different products. If Donald Trump made money off from branding that means a product or service was deemed superior. Branding fails when products are bad. What's funny is a lot of Donald Trumps wealth comes from his real estate.

Starting a business is one of the hardest things you can do. And it's risky. 4 out of 5 business fails. Donald Trump declaring bankruptcy isn't uncommon among entrepreneurs. Almost all of the major airline carriers decleared bankruptcy at one point. Does that mean all the airline carriers are bad companies. Obviously not.

You talk about a lack of public policy. Ronald Regan went from a movie star to being the governor of California.

As for qualifications to be President- there are only three requirements- natural born citizen, minimum age of 35, lived in the U.S. for 14 years.
I don't how is unqualified at all.

With Trump twitter feeds, he uses a lot of rhetoric. But what do his actions display? Since the beginning, he has created groups of experts to gain advice from them. Unfortunately, Elon Musk quit one of his teams. But at least Trump is working with other leaders in different industries to figure out what they think.

He is one of the most diplomatic presidents. He has visited many leaders around the world in the last 6 months, and probably more than any President has done.

A better word choice than xenophobic would be nationalistic. Which is why I don't understand if Trump is so nationalistic than why would he help the supposedly Russian narrative. It doesn't make sense. Or are you telling me he hates America so much he is pretending to nationalistic to help the Russians? Just by in itself that liberals do not actually make a coherent sequence of logical conclusion based on the previous history.

923 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M
Offline
Posted 8/12/17 , edited 8/12/17

OneEyedDragon wrote:

As for qualifications to be President- there are only three requirements- natural born citizen, minimum age of 35, lived in the U.S. for 14 years.
I don't how is unqualified at all.



He can be unqualified for president without being disqualified because he doesn't meet the requirements. Those are two different things.

Relevant to the discussion of Trump's narcissism and lack of attention span is this piece published by Jane Mayer for The New Yorker: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all

I copied and pasted the parts most relevant parts to our discussion so you can just read the parts I've quoted for this post. Sorry if it's a little long.



Starting in late 1985, Schwartz spent eighteen months with Trump—camping out in his office, joining him on his helicopter, tagging along at meetings, and spending weekends with him at his Manhattan apartment and his Florida estate. During that period, Schwartz felt, he had got to know him better than almost anyone else outside the Trump family. ... the prospect of President Trump terrified him. It wasn’t because of Trump’s ideology—Schwartz doubted that he had one. The problem was Trump’s personality, which he considered pathologically impulsive and self-centered ... If he were writing “The Art of the Deal” today, Schwartz said, it would be a very different book with a very different title. Asked what he would call it, he answered, “The Sociopath.”

...

Schwartz thought that “The Art of the Deal” would be an easy project. The book’s structure would be simple: he’d chronicle half a dozen or so of Trump’s biggest real-estate deals, dispense some bromides about how to succeed in business, and fill in Trump’s life story. For research, he planned to interview Trump on a series of Saturday mornings. The first session didn’t go as planned, however. After Trump gave him a tour of his marble-and-gilt apartment atop Trump Tower—which, to Schwartz, looked unlived-in, like the lobby of a hotel—they began to talk. But the discussion was soon hobbled by what Schwartz regards as one of Trump’s most essential characteristics: “He has no attention span.”

In those days, Schwartz recalls, Trump was generally affable with reporters, offering short, amusingly immodest quotes on demand. Trump had been forthcoming with him during the New York interview, but it hadn’t required much time or deep reflection. For the book, though, Trump needed to provide him with sustained, thoughtful recollections. He asked Trump to describe his childhood in detail. After sitting for only a few minutes in his suit and tie, Trump became impatient and irritable. He looked fidgety, Schwartz recalls, “like a kindergartner who can’t sit still in a classroom.” Even when Schwartz pressed him, Trump seemed to remember almost nothing of his youth, and made it clear that he was bored. Far more quickly than Schwartz had expected, Trump ended the meeting.

Week after week, the pattern repeated itself. Schwartz tried to limit the sessions to smaller increments of time, but Trump’s contributions remained oddly truncated and superficial.

“Trump has been written about a thousand ways from Sunday, but this fundamental aspect of who he is doesn’t seem to be fully understood,” Schwartz told me. “It’s implicit in a lot of what people write, but it’s never explicit—or, at least, I haven’t seen it. And that is that it’s impossible to keep him focussed on any topic, other than his own self-aggrandizement, for more than a few minutes, and even then . . . ” Schwartz trailed off, shaking his head in amazement. He regards Trump’s inability to concentrate as alarming in a Presidential candidate. “If he had to be briefed on a crisis in the Situation Room, it’s impossible to imagine him paying attention over a long period of time,” he said.

In a recent phone interview, Trump told me that, to the contrary, he has the skill that matters most in a crisis: the ability to forge compromises. The reason he touted “The Art of the Deal” in his announcement, he explained, was that he believes that recent Presidents have lacked his toughness and finesse: “Look at the trade deficit with China. Look at the Iran deal. I’ve made a fortune by making deals. I do that. I do that well. That’s what I do.”

But Schwartz believes that Trump’s short attention span has left him with “a stunning level of superficial knowledge and plain ignorance.” He said, “That’s why he so prefers TV as his first news source—information comes in easily digestible sound bites.” He added, “I seriously doubt that Trump has ever read a book straight through in his adult life.” During the eighteen months that he observed Trump, Schwartz said, he never saw a book on Trump’s desk, or elsewhere in his office, or in his apartment.

Other journalists have noticed Trump’s apparent lack of interest in reading. In May, Megyn Kelly, of Fox News, asked him to name his favorite book, other than the Bible or “The Art of the Deal.” Trump picked the 1929 novel “All Quiet on the Western Front.” Evidently suspecting that many years had elapsed since he’d read it, Kelly asked Trump to talk about the most recent book he’d read. “I read passages, I read areas, I’ll read chapters—I don’t have the time,” Trump said. As The New Republic noted recently, this attitude is not shared by most U.S. Presidents, including Barack Obama, a habitual consumer of current books, and George W. Bush, who reportedly engaged in a fiercely competitive book-reading contest with his political adviser Karl Rove.

...

Schwartz went to his room, called his literary agent, Kathy Robbins, and told her that he couldn’t do the book. (Robbins confirms this.) As Schwartz headed back to New York, though, he came up with another plan. He would propose eavesdropping on Trump’s life by following him around on the job and, more important, by listening in on his office phone calls. That way, extracting extended reflections from Trump would not be required. When Schwartz presented the idea to Trump, he loved it. Almost every day from then on, Schwartz sat about eight feet away from him in the Trump Tower office, listening on an extension of Trump’s phone line. Schwartz says that none of the bankers, lawyers, brokers, and reporters who called Trump realized that they were being monitored. The calls usually didn’t last long, and Trump’s assistant facilitated the conversation-hopping. While he was talking with someone, she often came in with a Post-it note informing him of the next caller on hold.

“He was playing people,” Schwartz recalls. On the phone with business associates, Trump would flatter, bully, and occasionally get mad, but always in a calculated way. Before the discussion ended, Trump would “share the news of his latest success,” Schwartz says. Instead of saying goodbye at the end of a call, Trump customarily signed off with “You’re the greatest!” There was not a single call that Trump deemed too private for Schwartz to hear. “He loved the attention,” Schwartz recalls. “If he could have had three hundred thousand people listening in, he would have been even happier.”

This year, Schwartz has heard some argue that there must be a more thoughtful and nuanced version of Donald Trump that he is keeping in reserve for after the campaign. “There isn’t,” Schwartz insists. “There is no private Trump.” This is not a matter of hindsight. While working on “The Art of the Deal,” Schwartz kept a journal in which he expressed his amazement at Trump’s personality, writing that Trump seemed driven entirely by a need for public attention. “All he is is ‘stomp, stomp, stomp’—recognition from outside, bigger, more, a whole series of things that go nowhere in particular,” he observed, on October 21, 1986. But, as he noted in the journal a few days later, “the book will be far more successful if Trump is a sympathetic character—even weirdly sympathetic—than if he is just hateful or, worse yet, a one-dimensional blowhard.”

Eavesdropping solved the interview problem, but it presented a new one. After hearing Trump’s discussions about business on the phone, Schwartz asked him brief follow-up questions. He then tried to amplify the material he got from Trump by calling others involved in the deals. But their accounts often directly conflicted with Trump’s. “Lying is second nature to him,” Schwartz said. “More than anyone else I have ever met, Trump has the ability to convince himself that whatever he is saying at any given moment is true, or sort of true, or at least ought to be true.” Often, Schwartz said, the lies that Trump told him were about money—“how much he had paid for something, or what a building he owned was worth, or how much one of his casinos was earning when it was actually on its way to bankruptcy.” ...

Schwartz says of Trump, “He lied strategically. He had a complete lack of conscience about it.” Since most people are “constrained by the truth,” Trump’s indifference to it “gave him a strange advantage.”

When challenged about the facts, Schwartz says, Trump would often double down, repeat himself, and grow belligerent. This quality was recently on display after Trump posted on Twitter a derogatory image of Hillary Clinton that contained a six-pointed star lifted from a white-supremacist Web site. Campaign staffers took the image down, but two days later Trump angrily defended it, insisting that there was no anti-Semitic implication. Whenever “the thin veneer of Trump’s vanity is challenged,” Schwartz says, he overreacts—not an ideal quality in a head of state.

...

In my phone interview with Trump, he initially said of Schwartz, “Tony was very good. He was the co-author.” But he dismissed Schwartz’s account of the writing process. “He didn’t write the book,” Trump told me. “I wrote the book. I wrote the book. It was my book. And it was a No. 1 best-seller, and one of the best-selling business books of all time. Some say it was the best-selling business book ever.” (It is not.) Howard Kaminsky, the former Random House head, laughed and said, “Trump didn’t write a postcard for us!”

Trump was far more involved in the book’s promotion. He wooed booksellers and made one television appearance after another. He publicly promised to donate his cut of the book’s royalties to charity. He even made a surprise trip to New Hampshire, where he stirred additional publicity by floating the possibility that he might run for President.

In December of 1987, a month after the book was published, Trump hosted an extravagant book party in the pink marble atrium of Trump Tower. Klieg lights lit a red carpet outside the building. Inside, nearly a thousand guests, in black tie, were served champagne and fed slices of a giant cake replica of Trump Tower, which was wheeled in by a parade of women waving red sparklers. The boxing promoter Don King greeted the crowd in a floor-length mink coat, and the comedian Jackie Mason introduced Donald and Ivana with the words “Here comes the king and queen!” Trump toasted Schwartz, saying teasingly that he had at least tried to teach him how to make money.

Schwartz got more of an education the next day, when he and Trump spoke on the phone. After chatting briefly about the party, Trump informed Schwartz that, as his ghostwriter, he owed him for half the event’s cost, which was in the six figures. Schwartz was dumbfounded. “He wanted me to split the cost of entertaining his list of nine hundred second-rate celebrities?” Schwartz had, in fact, learned a few things from watching Trump. He drastically negotiated down the amount that he agreed to pay, to a few thousand dollars, and then wrote Trump a letter promising to write a check not to Trump but to a charity of Schwartz’s choosing. It was a page out of Trump’s playbook. In the past seven years, Trump has promised to give millions of dollars to charity, but reporters for the Washington Post found that they could document only ten thousand dollars in donations—and they uncovered no direct evidence that Trump made charitable contributions from money earned by “The Art of the Deal.”


You also mention that


With Trump twitter feeds, he uses a lot of rhetoric. But what do his actions display? Since the beginning, he has created groups of experts to gain advice from them. Unfortunately, Elon Musk quit one of his teams. But at least Trump is working with other leaders in different industries to figure out what they think.


Peter Thiel, a Silicon Valley tech entrepreneur who was one of the few people who spoke out on Trump's behalf when even few Republicans would endorse him, has since then told others in private that he thinks Trump's administration is incompetent.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/8/7/16107192/peter-thiel-investment-donald-trump-incompetent


More recently, Mac reports, Thiel has been described as “annoyed” by the Trump administration’s lack of movement on policy, and perhaps most damningly, told guests at an event in San Francisco in May that the Trump administration is “incompetent” after all.


Finally, you say that



As far as how Donald accumulated wealth, you mention branding? People have a misconception of branding. In order for a brand to be successful, the product or service must be superior for consumers to buy different products. If Donald Trump made money off from branding that means a product or service was deemed superior. Branding fails when products are bad. What's funny is a lot of Donald Trumps wealth comes from his real estate.


I don't think that's how branding works, but I'm not well-read on the topic, so I don't have anything to say to that.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.