Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (959010)	8/24/2016 7:23:54 PM
From: Sdgla	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1576312

Why are you concerned about Trump and charitable donations ? If its character that worries you then you cannot vote for the liars Clinton. How many women did Hillary shame after Bill raped them ? Answer : more than 1 and less than 15. Take your hypocrisy and lube it up with jelly.. will go up easier.

To: combjelly who wrote (959010)	8/24/2016 11:15:39 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576312

I don't see the link. But there is no material difference between 11% and 13%. Call it 12%. The point is that given their funding sources, they ought to be spending more on charities and less on flying people around in private jets. It is true that the analysis of these data are probably more complicated than can be put up in easily digestible form. And there are organizations for which 12% would not be that bad. But this one has no significant publicity expense. Its overhead consists of what? Salaries of Friends of Hillary. T&E. Office expenses. That is it. Cost of raising money is excellent at under 2%. It doesn't have to be much when your charging people for appointments with the Secretary of State. 12% is not impressive for programs. There is no reason they couldn't spend more on programs.