Login or register
Anonymous comments allowed.
#17 - inyourmind
Reply +20
(09/14/2012) [-]
The world trade centers had multiple attempts to brings them down before 9/11. Larry had just purchased the towers for 3.5 billion dollars in 2001. The insurance policy he took out for them was nothing extraordinary and the towers always had insurance on them because they were known targets for terrorists. So basically what I'm trying to say is this is a false argument but the man was a crook for attempting to get double his insurance out of it based on a technicality (which he didn't get). He was insured for double the towers value which would total about 4.4 billion dollars which he got.

He had to continue paying property rent while the towers are being rebuilt. This rent is 100 million per year. The land resulted in no profit for him while being built and have cost him 1.1 billion dollars in rent without profit. This means he has spent 4.6 billion dollars on the towers getting back 4.4 billion. This means that even if he kept the insurance money he still made a rather sizable financial loss. However he has spent the insurance money on the rebuilding of the towers which are unlikely to ever be highly profitable.

So there you go with simple addition, subtraction, and knowledge of the towers you can tell this argument is invalid.
#22 to #17 - grpeephole [OP]
Reply -2
(09/14/2012) [-]
he received 7 billion for the towers and reserved the right to rebuild the towers if they were to collaspe. i suggest you do some fact checking
#46 to #22 - inyourmind
Reply 0
(09/15/2012) [-]
Except for I fact checked everything that I put in to the comment. You may want to try doing that as well rather then going off and questioning my information.
#32 to #22 - anon
Reply 0
(09/14/2012) [-]
If he owned them then that's his business, commie faggot