This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
And it would have been very easy for Trump, et al, to look at property records in the area and show that prices indeed increased fifty-fold from 1985 to 2021. Did they do so? There is no evidence of that. And if they didn't, then what is the basis for claiming that the court decision is meritless?
Thank you. That is very valuable information.
He did do that he presented expert testimony for higher valuations
According to the decision, he did not, because the expert opinion did not include any facts. As the court said, under established law, "Where the expert's ultimate assertions are speculative or unsupported by any evidentiary foundation, however, the opinion should be given no probative force and is insufficient to withstand summary judgment." Diaz v New York Downtown Hosp., 99 NY2d 542 (2002). Had the expert said something like, "I reviewed sales records for nearby properties since 1985 and found that they had appreciated an average of 50x, so I estimate that Mar A Lago was worth Y dollars at the time in question, then there would be cause for complaint. Did he say that, or anything similar?
It’s past my legal ability but for market value purposes a top broker in the market would seem to be a reasonable expert witness.
That being said (and I’ve edited my top post) I wouldn’t quote this judges reasoning. He’s made shit up before and been reversed.
Here’s a quote:
“He said, “You can’t just do this because the zoning allows it. I just can’t believe this is the case.”
Alas for Engoron, it was the case — so the higher court reversed him. “
So in the past he’s admitted a developer was doing something “legal” and ruled against him anyway.
https://nypost.com/2023/09/27/mar-a-lago-judges-developer-hating-past-is-a-big-win-for-donald-trump/
The $25 million figure isn’t even used in the prosecutors brief. They use better arguments some of which may be correct (I think trump may have been overvaluing 50%).
Of course he is an expert. No one has said otherwise. The point is that an expert's opinion must be based on evidence. As another court put it, "Like a house built on sand, the expert's opinion is no better than the facts on which it is based." Kennemur v. State of California, 133 Cal. App. 3d 907, 923 (1982)
Here’s the filing. https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/tto_complaint.pdf
It’s page 110. But also on your (2) the judge specifically says “2300%” overvaluation. You are creating a motte and Bailey. I’ve repeatedly said I think Trumps figures look high to me. I’m not debating that. My point has consistently been the 25 is stupid.
Coming to a “hard” valuation on this property is nearly impossible. It has land use restrictions. It’s also the most prestigious property in arguably the most prestigious neighborhood in the USA. How much would a tech mega billionaire pay for it to have a family heirloom for their family? Could be anything. So I’m not sure you can do better than a local market expert because their are not comps for it.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link