Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1
We're discussing Trump so I reckon the nepotism question is relevant.
I just don't see a good reason from a risk-benefit perspective for Trump to employ his daughter. She doesn't need the money and he must have lots of loyal and capable employees from his companies who would happily serve him in his presidential role. If she's not being paid though, then I can't see any problem with it.
In contrast, I can see how in France a poorer Francois Fillon might feel that employing his wife helps the family coffers, despite the potential reputational risks.
|
I have to disagree with you here. What a White House staffer gets paid is peanuts compared to her personal wealth or indeed the wealth of most families who occupy the White House.
She has the position because she is his daughter .. and that's nepotism.
---------- Post added at 00:12 ---------- Previous post was at 00:09 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1
Although it's still nepotism, I have stated that I don't have a problem with it if she's unpaid.
|
This I do not understand. What has pay got to do with it? The pay would be an irrelevance to her ..