2020 Race Preview: Howard Schultz One-Ups Trump In Battle Of The Billionaires

Billionaire Howard Schultz is looking more and more like a contender to take on President Trump in 2020 as the Starbucks executive chairman who announced his end-of-month departure from the board gave some very Presidential sounding answers to CNBC Squawk Box host Andrew Ross Sorkin on a wide range of topics, from Trump's trade policy towards China, to US border policy.

While Schultz was certain to hedge against speculation, saying "There's a lot of things I can do as a private citizen other than run for the presidency of the United States ... Let's just see what happens," one can only conclude after watching the interview that if there ever was a prelude to a bid for the White House, this interview is it. 

“Going back to China and trade… this rhetoric about all these trade wars that are now being engaged with China, with Mexico, with Canada… this might sound like a trite line, but it’s important," Schultz said. "We should not be in the business of building walls, we should be in the business of building bridges.

Schultz suggested that instead of worrying about China, the U.S. needs to focus on the national debt. 

“We are in a trade battle here that I do not understand. Our problem is not China. Our problem is here in the US we have $21 trillion in debt.”

Schultz also said Trump's border policy is "inhumane," and said he is concerned "for the country and the standing in the word, the lack of dignity, lack of respect coming from the administration. I think we can do much better."

On the economy, Schultz thinks it's "very wrong to use the stock market as a proxy for the U.S. economy," saying "I don't believe that the stock market is going to continue to grow at the level it has between now and 2020. You're going to see a sea-change." 

In short, Schultz predicted a stock market correction over the next 18 months - as we don't imagine "sea change" means equity growth will simply moderate.

You also have systemic problems in the country, the likes of which we have not had in a long time. You got a major mental health crisis, you got a major homeless crisis, you got an opiates crisis, you have racial divide in this country. And you also have 45% of American households that don't have four-hundred dollars (41%, but close), and you also have 67% of the workforce in America among men that are not in it. 

Schultz will be stepping down as Starbucks executive chairman effective June 26, and will be replaced by Myron "Mike" Ullman - former chairman of JCPenny.

Schultz vs. Trump - battle of the wallet bulge

When it comes to net worth, Bloomberg calculates that the 64-year-old Schultz has a $3.2 billion fortune to mount a bid for public office - around $400 million more than the 71-year-old Trump, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index.

His fortune includes a 2.6 percent stake in Starbucks valued at $2 billion; stock options worth $150 million; and a $1.1 billion investment portfolio seeded by dividends and previous stock sales. Schultz’s net worth, closely tied to fluctuations in Starbucks’ stock, has climbed $61 million so far this year.

Trump's net worth, on the other hand, has slid to $2.8 billion over the past year - a decline of $100 million. 

The drop, the second in two years, is based on figures compiled by the Bloomberg Billionaires Index from lenders, property records, annual reports, market data and a May 16 financial disclosure. It occurred as Trump began his second year in the White House and his name was stripped from buildings in Toronto, Manhattan and Panama.

The most recent estimate, down from $2.9 billion last June, is the lowest since Bloomberg began tracking Trump’s wealth in 2015. The biggest declines, totaling $220 million, came from adjacent buildings in midtown Manhattan: 6 E. 57th St., which previously housed a Niketown store, and Trump Tower, where lower occupancy resulted in less income. -Bloomberg

Then again, one wonders how much Schultz's net worth would drop were he to run, and win, especially if that "sea-change" stock market correction comes sooner than later. 

Comments

DownWithYogaPants Escrava Isaura Tue, 06/05/2018 - 17:11 Permalink

All we need is a Jewish president to round out our society's full spectrum dominance by the Private Central Banking Cartel. 

Don't get the wrong idea here: I have Jewish friends in the STEM fields that are great people.  

.........but the sociopathic Private Central Banking / Media Cabal  Jew is not the friend of liberty.  We don't need another ZioCon / NeoCon president.  They need wars to advance their anti rule of law wealth agenda.   They loot whole countries to feed the bloodsucking private central banking model.

All the best rackets the Italian mob became known for originated with the Jewish mobsters. It's plain and simple that their sociopaths are smarter and therefore more injurious to free commerce and society.

In reply to by Escrava Isaura

Escrava Isaura Boonster Wed, 06/06/2018 - 02:04 Permalink

Kind of like today.

Do you see Middle East armies in Europe and US?

Your history and critical thinking are very distorted, but not surprising when one have been brainwashed.

Middle East was most tribes with several gods. Muhammad united them behind one god. And he used the Jewish God; after all, they’re cousins.

Once united those tribes could face the Europeans that were in the Middle East collecting taxes, rent, and stealing those tribe’s goods while creating wars between the tribes. Well, here were some Mongols there as well trying to collect taxes, rent, and stealing those tribe’s goods as well.

Anyway, once these tribes gained control of their land, then they expanded into Europe.

The Middle Easterns didn’t starting the looting and wars in the Middle East. The Europeans did followed by the Mongols. The Crusades, Knight Templers, Teutonic Knights and few others were basic fundamentalist Christian war on the Muslim.

What basically brought these fundamentalists Christians down were not the Muslim but themselves, because they were stealing from each other and the Christians pilgrims. The local Templers were the first bankers.

 

In reply to by Boonster

Escrava Isaura 1 Alabama Tue, 06/05/2018 - 18:04 Permalink

Mighty god was the first politician created 3,400 year ago. Jewish was the first political party.

Religion and politics are ideologies. A way to organize society.

Science is the only method to understand how the universe and the world work. However, it won't lead humanity to a good outcome.

Accordingly to Steve Pinker, if there’s a god his first commandment now would be thou shalt not enrich uranium.

 

In reply to by 1 Alabama

Publicus_Reanimated Escrava Isaura Tue, 06/05/2018 - 18:20 Permalink

Nice try and thank for playing.  Hebrew monotheism descends directly from Egyptian monotheism.  The number of years you cite does calculate back to the high point of Akhenaten but assumes he was its creator rather than the first pharaoh to be an open adherent of it.  Ergo your statement about the first political party is nonsense.  But keep posting, it's really entertaining.

In reply to by Escrava Isaura

edotabin Stan522 Tue, 06/05/2018 - 17:39 Permalink

Absolutely. Money definitely helps but isn't everything.

Also, maybe you read a comment I posted about 2 weeks ago about Schultz? Granted, I didn't specifically foresee him running for president (and who knows if he actually will) but the general idea was that he turned Starbux into the nation's public bathroom/injection point but can go on to do whatever he wants whereas the average Joe gets caught up in the wake of his BS decisions and that has very real consequences.

In reply to by Stan522

lester1 legalize Tue, 06/05/2018 - 16:56 Permalink

The the 2020 Democrat party primary going to be an absolute freak Show. You're going to see Tom Steyer run, Zuckerberg run, Eric Holder run, Bernie run, and even Hillary I think we'll run again. It's going to be who can shift farthest to the left and who can hate Trump the most. Schultz will run, but he won't win. He's not radical enough.

Whoever wins that Royal Rumble is going to lose to President Trump in a landslide. The Democrat Party has shifted too far to the left.

In reply to by legalize