Status as wealthy automatically does not make an individual someone from whom advice you should take .

So Kevin O'leary (ironically, he's Canadian) is back in the news asserting seizure of Trump's assets in response to his apparent inability to pony up imposed penalties is damaging to "the essence of what makes the American brand the No. 1 economy on Earth."; First off, it's pretty clear from his commentary he's -to be generous- muzzy on the distinction between branding and the U.S. economy so that's an automatic strike against. An economy is "the wealth and resources of a country or region, especially in terms of the production and consumption of goods and services" and branding is "the promotion of a particular product or company by means of advertising and distinctive design." Does one have bearing on the other? Sure --still two different things though. But what is the "American brand"? Last I checked, the Pledge of Alliegence made it pretty clear the core of the American brand is "one Nation under [deity], Indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for All. In order to have those last two things in the same bottle, they must be miscible. And they are; one has the Liberty to choose whether or not to commit a crime. If one chooses poorly, one is, thereafter, subject to the machinery of Justice. So which is more damaging to the American brand? Is it proving the P of A is nothing more than lip service to principles quickly abandoned when butthurts are trending upward or is it steadfast, resolute adherence to rule of law, demonstration that no citizen, regardless of wealth or power, stands outside its strictures? And if the threat of being held to account for crimes committed deters businesses from establishing in a locale, doesn't that tend to tell on said businesses per their practices? How is that damaging to America?