How I Stopped Buying Things I Don't Need

This article is part of HuffPost’s “Reclaim” campaign, an ongoing project spotlighting the world’s waste crisis and how we can begin to solve it.

I’m kind of an impulsive shopper. You might even call me a compulsive shopper. I never met a white Zara blouse I didn’t like. 

I’m also an introvert who primarily enjoys the company of New York City streets. This means a Saturday walk in November can easily turn into a $75 binge on bathing suit bottoms at H&M.

I buy something cool and cheap, rip the tags from my bounty and, by the next week, I’ve lost all interested in wearing it. On top of that, I hate returning things. My aversion is rooted in a chronic lack of patience, general interpersonal anxiety and tendency to become lightheaded while waiting in lines.

When you don’t have a ton of money or an excess of square footage to call home, these habits can get out of hand. Within the last year, I realized things for me were way, way out of hand. 

Running late to work one day, with my hands two feet deep in new blouses, I was forced to confront the fact that I was draining a modest bank account into an even more modest bedroom closet.

The person I wanted to be has one quality black blazer she wears every day. The person I had become would crawl beneath a sale rack to claim three.

Solving my problem meant confronting a lifetime of neuroses and unproductive coping mechanisms. The first step was to start returning unworn items to the stores where I found them. The next would be to stop over-buying altogether.

I was draining a modest bank account into an even more modest bedroom closet.

Fashion is estimated to be one of the most polluting industries in the world. One facet of this complex problem is the sheer volume of stuff we throw out: About 85 percent of America’s 15.1 million tons of textile waste ended up in landfills in 2013. Secondhand clothes are often sent to cheap markets in the developing world, compromising local vendors’ ability to compete.

According to the International Labor Organization, many of the 170 million child laborers across the globe are employed in garment and textile-making industries ― in part because of massive demand for inexpensive, trendy clothes in the Western world. 

Meanwhile, my walls were dripping with cheap scarves and reckless materialism. I was paying a premium for cage-free eggs from chickens treated better than some of the humans who made my clothes. I was dropping off piles of never-worn polyester to Goodwill on the way to the farmers market with reusable bags. It didn’t make sense to me anymore.

NinaMalyna via Getty Images

It me!

But returning things was not a habit I ever developed. It’s certainly not something I ever learned from my parents. My mom grew up poor and my dad grew up cheap, so I inherited an irrepressible drive to acquire as many things as possible for the lowest possible price. Where frugality began, more good sense didn’t always follow. If you took a gamble on a bargain purchase and it didn’t work out, you just cut your losses.

Why spend two hours and $5 on subway fare to return a $10 blouse when you can just buy more hangers? 

More importantly, shopping for deals was a bonding activity for my mother, sister and me. Even as an adult confronting my own issues with clutter and overspending, the idea of declining my mother’s invitations to the outlet mall fills me with guilt.

For our family, buying things for people is an act of love. My mother sent me many of the unworn items that remain in my closet, which I imagine her buying and mailing with an excitement I understand all too well. A therapist once told me that my “money issues” with regard to shopping are really my “mommy issues.” I stopped by Urban Outfitters on the way home.

So here’s how I began to break out of the cycle. 

I could keep buying clothing under two conditions: I’d leave the tags on an item until I wore it, and I’d keep my receipts. Previously I’d throw away both immediately with post-purchase euphoria. And rather than wear the item immediately, I’d wait until I really wanted to wear it. Often, that moment never came. 

A therapist once told me my “money issues” are really my “mommy issues.” I stopped by Urban Outfitters on the way home.

I found that when I bought a new item on a whim, I’d get bored with it faster than its return policy would expire. I always had the option to bring it back.

Parting with the item was painless, but something that took 10 minutes to buy often took far, far more time to return. It wasn’t long before I realized the excitement of buying something new wasn’t worth the time and effort involved in returning it. 

Finally, a closet filled with cheap clothes I barely liked no longer appealed to me. And now that I was keeping better track of the items I bought only to endure an aggressive Zara return line a week later, I just couldn’t be bothered to buy them in the first place. 

With that small change, I’m happier and slightly richer. I feel better about myself as a global citizen and as a woman with at least a little self-discipline. Walking past a department store on payday isn’t exactly easy, but paying rent on time and choosing an outfit in under five minutes definitely is. 

While I didn’t completely cure myself of the impulse to shop, I put up enough barriers to doing so that I created a clearer path to reducing frivolous consumption. Will I resist buying underwear later this week to postpone doing laundry? Well, I’m only human. 

More stories like this:

• This Family Went A Whole Year Without Buying New Clothes
• These African Countries Don’t Want Your Used Clothing Anymore
• The ‘Chilling’ Moment This Father Realized Where His Kids’ Clothes Come From
• Before Buying More Clothes At H&M, Read This
• Something To Think About Before Donating Your Clothes
• This Company Is Basically A Hospital For Sad, Damaged Clothes
• Why This Company Wants You To Fall In Love With People’s Old Jeans

There Are More Immigrant Billionaires In The U.S. Than Ever Before

The Forbes 400 list might look like just a bunch of really, really rich Americans from afar. But what’s notable this year is that an unprecedented number of those who made the list ― including three married couples ― are foreign-born. 

Overall, the 42 foreign-born entries on the 400 list have a combined net worth of nearly $250 billion, and come from 21 different countries. With six people, Israel has the most representation, followed by India with five, and Hungary and Taiwan with four each. As far as continents, Asia and Europe led the pack with 21 and 15 people, respectively.

Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google, is 10th on the list. His estimated net worth is $37.5 billion, according to Forbes. He and his family fled Soviet Russia when he was 6 years old due to anti-Semitism.

George Soros, the richest hedge fund manager in the world, also made the list. His family survived Nazi-occupied Hungary, fleeing when the country was overtaken by communism. 

America's 400 richest people are worth more than ever before: a combined $2.4 trillion https://t.co/7ok3eTho7O #Forbes400 pic.twitter.com/95RFWVC3AC

— Forbes (@Forbes) October 5, 2016

It’s impressive to see the ways in which these billionaires have given back to causes that are tied to their own immigrant experiences. Brin, for instance, donated $1 million to HIAS, the nonprofit that helped his family resettle in the U.S., in 2009. Soros pledged $500 million to help refugees and migrants in September.

Also of note ― one-third of the foreign-born billionaires on the list are richer than Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, whose net worth has dropped to $3.7 billion, down $800 million from last year, Forbes said.

Familiar names still sit at the top of the list. Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft, holds the No. 1 slot with a net worth of $81 billion, followed by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, worth $67 billion, Warren Buffett, worth $65.5 billion and Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s founder, worth $55.5 billion.

Snapchat Is Reportedly Planning A $25 Billion IPO

Snapchat’s video messages may be ephemeral, but its staying power as a startup in a hotly competitive field may be anything but.

The company last month renamed itself Snap Inc. to mark the launch of a line of sunglasses with built-in cameras, its second product after its popular social network. Now the Los Angeles-based firm is working on an initial public offering that could value the company at $25 billion or more, according to a report on Thursday in The Wall Street Journal.

The move, expected by late March, would be the most closely watched stock market debut in years.

Snap’s prominence has soared over the last five years, and with it, its value.

In May, the company’s worth surged to nearly $18 billion, placing it firmly in the top five most valuable “unicorns,” a term used for privately held startups worth more than $1 billion. 

By June, Snapchat had surpassed Twitter in users, with 150 million people using its service each day, a 36 percent increase from last December. Ten-year-old Twitter, by contrast, had just 140 million daily active users.

Ironically, Snap arguably would be the highest-profile tech IPO since Twitter made its disastrous debut three years ago, which sent its value up to $24 billion. The company, symbolized by its little blue bird, has struggled to attract new users and the advertising dollars that come with them. Twitter reportedly is seeking a buyer before its Oct. 27 earnings call, but the only suitor considering a bid may be cloud-computing giant Salesforce, Recode reported on Thursday. 

Snap may be better positioned. For starters, the company makes money, even if it has yet to turn a profit.

Last year, Snap, tapping its popularity with the coveted teenage demographic, started charging advertisers $750,000 a day for TV-style ads. Earlier this year, the company dropped its ad prices. A “Live Story” ― compilations of users’ videos or photos from a specific event or location ― costs about $250,000, CNBC reported in February. Taking over a “Discover” channel ― branded sections in which publishers such as Mashable, CNN or Comedy Central post daily magazine-like features ― goes for about $50,000.

A Snap spokesman declined to comment on ad prices. 

Snap told investors earlier this year it expected to earn between $250 million and $350 million in revenue this year and as much as $1 billion next year, according to the Wall Street Journal report.

OLIVIER DOULIERY via Getty Images

Snapchat CEO Evan Spiegel with his fiancée, Australian model Miranda Kerr. 

Ads aren’t Snap’s only business anymore. The company is selling Spectacles, its first-ever hardware, for $129.99. Given that Snap describes itself as “a camera company” on its website, Spectacles may not be its last foray into selling actual things. 

That revenue could help stave off intrusive new advertising features that have historically frustrated longtime users of ad-supported social networks.

Soon after Facebook went public in 2012 ― the biggest tech IPO in history, at about $104 billion ― users began complaining about ads appearing in their timelines. But Facebook, almost entirely reliant on advertising at that point, needed the money. 

Last month, CEO Evan Spiegel said changing the firm’s official name to Snap Inc. served as a way of separating the products from the parent company. 

“Changing our name also has another benefit: when you search for our products it will be easier to find relevant product information rather than boring company information or financial analysis,” he wrote in a blog post. “You can search Snapchat or Spectacles for the fun stuff and leave Snap Inc. for the Wall Street crowd :)”

The Snap spokesman declined to comment “on rumors or speculation about any financing plans.” 

But, given Spiegel’s explicit nod to Wall Street, perhaps he should have ended his paragraph with ;) instead. 

Behind the Listing: the Struggles of an Amazon Based Startup

"Such a great razor! My boyfriend bought one of these and I ended up using it so much that I had to buy one for myself. Definitely recommended - great close shave."
-Amazon Customer

When my Evahs razor arrived in the mail, I was instantly impressed by the packaging--a matte textured black surface with a glossy "Evahs" debossed across the top. I carefully opened the package like a perfectly wrapped Christmas present. Inside the box, the razor was well-secured in a specially designed tray. Integrated into the tray was a small compartment labeled "blades" in crisp font. The thoughtfulness of design extends beyond just the packaging. Meticulously crafted out of solid copper and chrome-plated to achieve a well-balanced weight and finish, this double edge safety razor boasts of precision.

The Evahs razor arrives in a carefully crafted package.

According to co-founders Arash Malek and Max Swift, "The Evahs razor is meant to be an heirloom piece--something that is known for its quality for generations." I sat down with both of them to talk about what it's like to be one of the many startups utilizing Amazon as a platform to sell products.

Evahs co-founders Maxwell Swift and Arash Malek.

Frustration, Meet Inspiration

The idea for the Evahs razor was born during a road trip through the Pacific Northwest. While driving through the Columbia River Gorge, Arash and Max, started listening to the Amazing Seller, a podcast by Scott Voelker that discusses successful entrepreneurship by way of Amazon. Instantly inspired, the two decided to pursue an e-commerce venture together. Previously frustrated by the lack of quality, fair-priced safety razors, they decided to take the matter into their own hands. By the time they returned home from their trip, they had already chosen the name Evahs, the word "shave" spelled backwards.

Thinking Inside the Box

"Constraint inspires creativity. It's one of my favorite sayings," Arash tells me during the interview. Working inside a framework forces you to eliminate the excess, leaving behind only what's necessary. Minimalism has inspired some of Arash's past work, like the well-known and successfully funded Kickstarter project the X-pen.

Despite their passion for working within constraints, Arash and Max have found Amazon's limitations to be quite challenging.

Max and Arash confront the the challenge of working inside the box by getting creative.

Max explains, "It's particularly hard as a new startup to stand out on Amazon with their limitations. But that doesn't mean we're not up for the challenge." He grins as he says this.

Crowned as the largest online retailer in the US, Amazon draws thousands of emerging small businesses looking to capitalize on the breadth of audience. Despite their limitations, Amazon has brought Evahs more business than they could've done on their own, and for that, the two tell me, they are extremely grateful.

While Amazon's sales process is pretty straightforward--"list, sell, ship"-- the accomplishment of the sale can be more complicated. On a site that's built on social proof, it can be difficult to gain the credibility that leads to orders and, in turn, more reviews. Amazon sellers need reviews to get more orders, but at the same time they need orders to get more reviews. Without the brand name recognition of say, Gillette, Evahs could easily get lost in the more than 55 pages of Amazon's safety razor category.

In order to overcome this problem, Max personally reached out to numerous top 500 Amazon reviewers. He sent them emails asking them if they would be willing to try out their razor for free, and in return, they would leave an unbiased review on their Amazon listing. To his surprise, nearly half of them replied and eventually wrote reviews after receiving their razors. Creative solutions like this have helped Evahs climb the ranks of the Amazon listings. They recently ranked on pages one and two for safety razors.

Avoiding the Void

Aside from getting more reviews, what else would help an emerging startup get noticed among the thousands of razors on Amazon? Customization--something that Amazon forbids unless you're a large company like Gillette or Schick.

An example of Amazon's uniform listing: the Evahs product set against a white background with limited text or distraction.

Amazon utilizes a standard template in order to make each listing as uniform as possible. The main image can only include the product that is being sold, set against a pure white background. Additionally, the ratio of the product image to the background white space has to be within a certain range, so that it looks the same as all other listings. Amazon also limits the amount of images posted per product and the amount of text allowed for the title and the description. In theory, this model allows sellers an equal chance of being noticed. On the flip side, companies struggle to make their products stand out due to indistinguishability.

"From the beginning, we chose to differentiate ourselves on Amazon by not compromising our quality," Max says proudly. The problem they faced: how to convey that quality within the constraints of Amazon. Their solution: turning to additional platforms like Instagram, Facebook, and shaving blogs.

Evahs leverages Instagram and other platforms to build their brand.

Out of the (Amazon) Box

Pushing past Amazon's rigid image and text style parameters, Evahs has been able to show off the true standard of their product on social media. With almost 15,000 Instagram followers, their feed features nature-inspired images that speak to Arash's preferred minimalist aesthetic. The two hope that the Instagram platform will allow them to convey that shaving is more than just a step in the grooming process; it's a morning ritual that should be savored, just how I savored opening the Evahs package.

Wells Fargo CEO Should Resign Over 'Egregious Fraud' With Fake Accounts, Lawmakers Say

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK - U.S. lawmakers called for Wells Fargo & Co chief John Stumpf to resign on Thursday and a top House Democrat demanded the bank be broken because it is too big to manage.

Stumpf’s second trip to Capitol Hill on Thursday went no better than his first as lawmakers from both parties angrily rebuked his handling of sales abuses and said the bank has damaged customer trust as well as the broader banking system.

Representative Maxine Waters, the committee’s ranking Democrat, said fraudulently opening accounts amounted to identity theft and called for Wells Fargo to be broken up because it is too big to manage.

She called the sales abuses “some of the most egregious fraud we have seen since the foreclosure crisis.”

“I’m moving forward to break up Wells Fargo bank,” Waters said.

Although Stumpf offered fixes for the widespread abuses, members of the House Financial Services Committee blasted him over the bank’s culture, his compensation, and whether those responsible got the appropriate punishment for overseeing the opening fee-generating phantom accounts. Several called for his resignation.

Representative Mick Mulvaney, a South Carolina Republican, said, “The damage you have done to the market and your industry far exceeds the damage you have done to your business.”

Wells Fargo shares fell 2.4 percent to $44.22. Since Sept. 7, the last trading day before the scandal broke, its stock has lost 11 percent, or about $27 billion in market value, based on Reuters data. The stock is trading at its lowest since early 2014.

Stumpf said he has had one conversation with Warren Buffett, whose company Berkshire Hathaway is Wells Fargo’s largest shareholder, since the penalties were announced Sept 8. Buffett’s secretary told Reuters he was not immediately available for comment.

Jeb Hensarling, the Republican chairman of the committee, said in his opening statement that he has lost faith in Wells Fargo, where he has a mortgage.

“Mr. Stumpf, I have a mortgage with your bank,” Hensarling said. “I wish I didn’t. I wish I was in the position to pay it off because you have broken my trust as you have broken the trust of millions.”

Stumpf said he was sorry the bank broke the trust of its customers and admitted under questioning that employees stole money through unwarranted fees.

“I am deeply sorry that we didn’t do the right thing,” Stumpf said in response to a lawmaker who said the scandal has eroded the bank’s market value.

Asked by Representative Sean Duffy, a Republican from Wisconsin, about whether Wells Fargo employees ‘stole,’ Stumpf said, “In some cases, they did.”

The sales practices have exploded into a scandal in Washington, on Main Street as well on Wall Street. The hearing, the second on Capitol Hill this month, raised the possibility lawmakers may look at banks’ sales practices beyond Wells Fargo.

Republicans on the committee have often advocated easing Wall Street regulations but at Thursday’s hearing they were among Stumpf’s strongest critics. Duffy said small fees wrongly levied on Wells Fargo accounts amounted to customer theft, an accusation Stumpf accepted.

Representative Steve Pearce, a Republican from New Mexico, faulted Stumpf for saying the company’s board could eventually be relied upon to sanction the executives responsible.

“I, sir, think you ought to submit a resignation and your board cannot hold off action on that,” he said.

Representative Brad Sherman, a Democrat from California, asked the committee to summon other Wall Street chiefs, including from Citigroup Inc and Bank of America Corp, to determine if they have imposed sales demands and quotas on their employees.

“I don’t think, Mr. Stumpf, that you should be alone in this joyous experience,” said the California Democrat.

Stumpf told lawmakers that Wells Fargo will eliminate sales quotas for branch staff starting Oct. 1, three months earlier than planned.

He said the bank was strengthening oversight of sales tactics and changing procedures for issuing credit cards. It also paid back past and current customers for any fees incurrent on the ghost accounts.

Earlier this week, the bank took back $41 million in stock awarded to Stumpf, an unprecedented rebuke to a major U.S. bank CEO, but the move is unlikely to silence calls for his resignation. Investigators found that branch staff opened as many as 2 million unauthorized credit card and deposit accounts to meet sales quotas.

When pushed about whether the bank would waive its mandatory arbitration rules so customers could sue the bank, he said “no.”

Representative Carolyn Maloney raised questions about $13 million in stock sales by the CEO in 2013 after he learned about the abuses. Stumpf said he sold stock with proper approvals and added that the sales were made “with no view about what was going on.”

The affair has triggered lawsuits, more investigations and wiped more than $20 billion from the bank’s market value.

On Wednesday, California, Wells Fargo’s home state, suspended business relationships with the bank for a year and said it would work with the state’s two giant public pension funds to change the management structure at the bank, including separating the roles of CEO and chairman.

The episode has been a stunning reversal for Stumpf, long regarded as a safe pair of hands in the industry for navigating Wells Fargo successfully through the financial crisis.

Thursday’s testimony follows a bipartisan tongue-lashing from the Senate Banking Committee on Sept. 20, when Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts called Stumpf a “gutless leader” who should be criminally investigated.

Criticizing Wells Fargo’s practice of calling its branches stores, Representative Ed Perlmutter, a Democrat from Colorado, said, “You don’t sell Veg-O-Matics. You don’t sell grapefruit. Why are you calling these things stores? You’re a bank.”

(Additional reporting by Ross Kerber in Boston and Lisa Lambert in Washington; Writing Nick Zieminski in New York; Editing by Carmel Crimmins, Jeffrey Benkoe and Alan Crosby)

How Businesses Can Foster Financial Literacy And Help Students Realize Their Potential

The workplace is evolving both in ways we can predict and in ways we cannot. Because the jobs of the future, due largely to emerging technologies, will require new skills and novel ways of solving problems and approaching tasks. Because we will need a workforce that is both stable and adaptable.

For individuals and organizations to reach their potential and prepare for the jobs of the future, they need access to opportunities and resources. With the costs of college rising, a collective $1.3 trillion in student loan debt has saddled young graduates, who are often unable to find jobs that allow them to pay it off, let alone launch a business or buy a home, like those in previous generations did at this stage in life.

Meanwhile, the gap in access is widening. In fact, wealth disparities are greater in the U.S. than in any other major developed nation, and African-American and Hispanic communities in inner cities find themselves disproportionately at the low end of the divide. This inequality has been generations in the making, but we must not wait any longer to address it. Preparing students with financial know-how is as important a step in their educational growth as helping them learn to interpret the world around them and reach their career potential.

We must work together to help young people be college-ready, to create education and training opportunities beyond the traditional classroom for workers who need to retool their skills, and find ways to help college students get off to a good start in their professional careers so that oppressive debt doesn’t stifle their potential. Businesses that commit to responsibly supporting their employees as well as the communities of families, educators and students they touch can help bring about this urgently needed change.

Responsible business initiatives that will help address these issues won’t look the same for every company. We can bring the greatest benefit by leveraging our businesses’ unique assets, strengths and resources. At PwC, we are celebrating milestones of our largest responsible business initiatives: reaching more than 3.5 million students and educators through our $190 million Earn Your Future™ (EYF) commitment to financial literacy, and marking the one-year anniversary of our Student Loan Paydown (SLP) program, which, happily, is becoming a more common business practice.

Today at Washington Ideas Forum, I’m taking the stage with Dee-1 to talk about financial literacy and student loans. A new and unlikely collaborator for PwC, Dee-1 is a popular hip-hop artist and former middle-school math teacher who will be embarking on an EYF and SLP Celebration Tour, visiting high schools and colleges to help us lead discussions on the importance of understanding financial concepts such as budgeting, debt and student loans.

The work we are doing together reflects how much we’ve learned about teaching financial literacy since we launched EYF four years ago, while reminding us of our biggest lesson: We must always evolve the way we educate and engage students. We’re shifting how we think about teaching and learning — and this is just the beginning.

Dee-1 has taken hold of PwC's social channels. Follow @PwC_LLP on Snapchat and Twitter and visit PwC's Facebook page to see the latest and join in the conversation.

Ford Fact-Checks Donald Trump's Jobs Claim During Debate

Ford Motor Co. went on the defensive during Monday night’s presidential debate after Republican nominee Donald Trump claimed the automaker planned to send “thousands of jobs” to Mexico.

“Our jobs are fleeing the country. They are going to Mexico,” Trump said during his first answer of the first debate. “So, Ford is leaving ― thousands of jobs. Leaving Michigan, leaving Ohio. They are all leaving.”

Ford announced earlier this month that it planned to spend $1.6 billion to construct a new factory to build small cars in Mexico’s San Luis Potosi. The new plant is expected to create 2,800 new jobs by 2020. 

But the company and the union that represents its works said there are no plans to cut jobs in the U.S. 

“Ford announced a plan to move production of the Ford Focus to Mexico so it can achieve financial success with that vehicle,” Christin Baker, a Ford spokeswoman, told The Huffington Post on Monday after the debate. “There is absolutely no impact on U.S. jobs.”

Rather, Ford said it plans to build two new vehicles at the Michigan factory where the hatchback and sedan were assembled. 

“Ford is moving two new vehicles to the Michigan plant where the Focus is produced ― and the company’s U.S. workforce at that plant will be making those new vehicles,” Baker said. “Ford will continue to make cars, SUVs and trucks in the United States, as its American workers have for more than 100 years.”

The response echoed earlier statements by Ford CEO Mark Fields after Trump went after the company. 

Bloomberg via Getty Images

Time to change the plate? Or get a new car? 

“It is really unfortunate the politics get in the way of the facts,” Fields said this month, adding that the company has created 28,000 jobs in the U.S. in the last five years. “Our investment here in the U.S. has never been stronger.”

Trump may be right to be skeptical.

Last year, during labor negotiations, the autoworkers union said Ford had committed to enough U.S. investment to cover as many as 8,500 new or saved jobs here. Still, as HuffPost previously reported, union chief Dennis Williams criticized the company’s Mexico investment in essentially the same way Trump did.

“For every investment in Mexico, it means jobs that could have and should have been available right here in the USA,” Williams said in an April statement. “This is another example of what’s wrong with NAFTA and why the TPP would be a disaster for the citizens of the United States. Companies continue to run to low-wage countries and import back into the United States. This is a broken system that needs to be fixed.”

Since then, the union brokered a new contract and changed its tune:

Fact Check: @Ford is not moving jobs out of Michigan. Our agreement secures future product commitments for affected plants. #Debates2016

— UAW (@UAW) September 27, 2016

Trump’s own business record became a sticking point during the debate, as Democrat Hillary Clinton slammed his repeated bankruptcies and complex financial ties to foreign lenders. 

“Sometimes there’s not a direct transfer of skills from business to government,” Clinton said. “But sometimes what happened in business would be really bad for government.” 

Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularlyincitespolitical violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe,racist, misogynist and birther who hasrepeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — fromentering the U.S.