Pages Navigation Menu
Categories Navigation Menu

FB messaging with Corran Addison

468501387_10164160980984128_1065396150595018246_n.jpg

Corran Addison

Sun, Feb. 2, 7:48 PM Calif. time

Gary Gevisser sent

Who is this David Honig?

Feb. 3, 4:07 AM

Corran

Professor of law

Mon 8:26 AM

GG sent

Do you have a way of contacting him?

8:27 am

Corran

you can facebook search him.

we’re friends on facebook but I don;t have his contac t details

8:28 AM

GG sent

Can you give me a link to his Facebook?

Corran

9k=.jpeg

8:31 AM

GG sent

That is strange. When I type his name on Facebook search, nothing appears.

Corran

unknown.jpg

Facebook

www.facebook.com

8:36 AM

GG sent

Thanks. 

Did you see my response to his writings which you placed on your wall?

8:38 AM

Corran

No. I’m getting thousands and thousands of response notifications

Mon 2:49 PM

GG sent

Have you had any direct communications with Honig?

Would you like to see what I sent him? You would first want to see what I wrote on your wall; and notice I placed the Latin adverb “sic” around your name because I thought it was you who had written that scathing attack on Trump.

2:50 PM

Corran

Yes David and I have had exchanges a little

Sure show me

2:53 PM

GG sent

Did you read my post?

2:53 PM

Corran

No I couldn’t find it

2:54 PM

GG sent

That’s interesting.

Let me see if I can find it and do a cut and paste

2:55 PM

Corran

Gives Thumbs up

There are thousands of shares and comments on my posts so it’s hard to find individual comments

2:57 PM

GG sent

Below is what you posted on July 9, 2018:

The best, most cogent and elegantly simple explanation into the inexplicably destructive negotiating processes of the president,by Prof. David Honig of Indiana University.

Everybody I know should read this accurate and enlightening piece…

“I’m going to get a little wonky and write about Donald Trump and negotiations. For those who don’t know, I’m an adjunct professor at Indiana University – Robert H. McKinney School of Law and I teach negotiations. Okay, here goes.

Trump, as most of us know, is the credited author of “The Art of the Deal,” a book that was actually ghost written by a man named Tony Schwartz, who was given access to Trump and wrote based upon his observations. If you’ve read The Art of the Deal, or if you’ve followed Trump lately, you’ll know, even if you didn’t know the label, that he sees all dealmaking as what we call “distributive bargaining.”

Distributive bargaining always has a winner and a loser. It happens when there is a fixed quantity of something and two sides are fighting over how it gets distributed. Think of it as a pie and you’re fighting over who gets how many pieces. In Trump’s world, the bargaining was for a building, or for construction work, or subcontractors. He perceives a successful bargain as one in which there is a winner and a loser, so if he pays less than the seller wants, he wins. The more he saves the more he wins.

The other type of bargaining is called integrative bargaining. In integrative bargaining the two sides don’t have a complete conflict of interest, and it is possible to reach mutually beneficial agreements. Think of it, not a single pie to be divided by two hungry people, but as a baker and a caterer negotiating over how many pies will be baked at what prices, and the nature of their ongoing relationship after this one gig is over.

The problem with Trump is that he sees only distributive bargaining in an international world that requires integrative bargaining. He can raise tariffs, but so can other countries. He can’t demand they not respond. There is no defined end to the negotiation and there is no simple winner and loser. There are always more pies to be baked. Further, negotiations aren’t binary. China’s choices aren’t (a) buy soybeans from US farmers, or (b) don’t buy soybeans. They can also (c) buy soybeans from Russia, or Argentina, or Brazil, or Canada, etc. That completely strips the distributive bargainer of his power to win or lose, to control the negotiation.

One of the risks of distributive bargaining is bad will. In a one-time distributive bargain, e.g. negotiating with the cabinet maker in your casino about whether you’re going to pay his whole bill or demand a discount, you don’t have to worry about your ongoing credibility or the next deal. If you do that to the cabinet maker, you can bet he won’t agree to do the cabinets in your next casino, and you’re going to have to find another cabinet maker.

There isn’t another Canada.

So when you approach international negotiation, in a world as complex as ours, with integrated economies and multiple buyers and sellers, you simply must approach them through integrative bargaining. If you attempt distributive bargaining, success is  impossible. And we see that already.

Trump has raised tariffs on China. China responded, in addition to raising tariffs on US goods, by dropping all its soybean orders from the US and buying them from Russia. The effect is not only to cause tremendous harm to US farmers, but also to increase Russian revenue, making Russia less susceptible to sanctions and boycotts, increasing its economic and political power in the world, and reducing ours. Trump saw steel and aluminum and thought it would be an easy win, BECAUSE HE SAW ONLY STEEL AND ALUMINUM – HE SEES EVERY NEGOTIATION AS DISTRIBUTIVE. China saw it as integrative, and integrated Russia and its soybean purchase orders into a far more complex negotiation ecosystem.

Trump has the same weakness politically. For every winner there must be a loser. And that’s just not how politics works, not over the long run.

For people who study negotiations, this is incredibly basic stuff, negotiations 101, definitions you learn before you even start talking about styles and tactics. And here’s another huge problem for us.

Trump is utterly convinced that his experience in a closely held real estate company has prepared him to run a nation, and therefore he rejects the advice of people who spent entire careers studying the nuances of international negotiations and diplomacy. But the leaders on the other side of the table have not eschewed expertise, they have embraced it. And that means they look at Trump and, given his very limited tool chest and his blindly distributive understanding of negotiation, they know exactly what he is going to do and exactly how to respond to it. 

From a professional negotiation point of view, Trump isn’t even bringing checkers to a chess match. He’s bringing a quarter that he insists of flipping for heads or tails, while everybody else is studying the chess board to decide whether its better to open with Najdorf or Grünfeld.”

— David Honig

2:59 PM

GG sent

Yesterday, a Jackie  Cowand reposted it.

3 PM

You sent

Yesterday, 2 Feb, at 9:20 AM Calif time I replied:

“Corran Addison” (sic) your 872 word speech does not mention why you think the land pricing in the bargaining of real estate is considered fair pricing.

You make out that you are an expert negotiator; have you any experience in negotiating minerals and chemicals on a global scale?

Btw, when I had just begun my post graduate economics-business studies in early 1978, still 20 years of age, and that included several tutoring sessions of first year economics-law students where I had overflowing attendance thanks to my first tutorial where at the very start I cut to the chase, and explained that if you want to learn how the real dog eat a dog (dead) world works, you would quit your university studies and seek out employment with the most wildly successful monopolist; namely, German-South African Harry Oppenheimer (1908-2000) whose partner German-American Charles W Engelhard Jr (1917-1971) owned Engelhard Minerals & Chemicals Corporation that was founded in 1902, following the end of the Anglo “American J P Morgan” Boer War (1899-1902) which the British won decisively.

Not to mention Harry’s father Sir Ernest Oppenheimer (1880-1957) arrived in South Africa that mines 80% of the world’s platinum, in pivotal year 1902, and immediately took over from deceased British monopolist Cecil Rhodes (1853-1902) in controlling the diamond fields of South Africa, and thereby the world’s drilling industry, thanks to the diamond tipped drilling bit, the exclusive domain of Rhodes who initiated the bloody war.

To mention in passing, Engelhard Jr. who also inherited the title Platinum King when his father of the same name died in 1950, began traveling to mineral rich South Africa in the late 1940s and soon took a minority interest in my immediate family’s ACME TIMBER INDUSTRIES, and 5 years later, 1956, took majority control from the Rothschilds’ Rand Corporation, which didn’t end Engelhard’s acquisitiveness. 

In 1967 Engelhard acquired Philipp Brothers who kept on underwhelming Marc Rich who 9 odd years earlier, 1958, after spending 6 months in South Africa negotiating with Engelhard-Oppenheimer to acquire a piddly manganese mine, returned to New York empty handed.

I kept looking for South African born and raised Elon Musk in your failed thesis.

His father, 150+ IQ electromechanical engineer Errol Graham Musk writes:

Gary, You need to write a big hard-cover book on the history of the past 100 years and on how humans interacted in this period and still do!

followed by:

Gary, you should definitely write a book because of your extensive true knowledge of the 20th century, even up to now. I’ve ‘read’ a book on the ‘Origins of Mankind’, written by a USA professor, given to me for my birthday. that was lauded as “amazing”. What a load of crap. A matric pupil could have written it! It should be easy (but hard work). You just start from the beginning.

Professor “Addison“ (sic) have you ever visited South Africa?

Do you have any questions?

3:02 PM

Corran

Ok found it. 

Who is Jackie cowand?

As you saw, that piece was written by David Honig not me. I credit him at the beginning and end of the repost.

3:05 PM

GG sent

Did you read my response?

I previously said I recognized my mistake in attributing Honig’s writings to you, hence the “sic” following your name which is placed in English quotation signs, indicating my error.

Mr. Addison, do you ever believe at times that God, defined simply as the creator of all things including the Human Sheep (Subanimal Human Evolutionary Ecological Problem) exists?

3:09 PM

Corran

Which god?

3:13 PM

GG sent

I thought I defined it very clearly; Creator of everything and everyone.

It is also okay if you say you are an atheist, and therefore at least since you became an atheist, you don’t believe God exists.

You ignored answering my question if you read my response?

3:19 PM

GG sent

Once you acknowledge that you have read it, just as many others including Errol Musk who clearly understands my unique knowledge of the history of modern day times, and you either have questions for me or you don’t, then I will share what I sent Honig via email.

Btw, there is no evidence, at least to my knowledge, that  God does not exist. Of course, God might not exist, but so far I have seen no evidence of that, versus the extraordinary evidence that God exists.

3:19 PM

Corran

Man has created many gods like the one you describe. So I’m asking you which one you’re referring to? Zeus? Kronos? Ra?

You cannot disprove the non existence of something. It’s a double negative. 

It’s a nifty little trick, but meaningless.

3:22 PM

GG sent

Call God anything you like, I could care less what name you use.

So, do you believe God exists or doesn’t exist?

Will you let me know when you have read my response which includes the endorsement from my fb friend Errol Musk?

3:31 PM

Corran

The likelyhood of an all powerful, all knowing, all seeing god as imagined by mankind is so remote as to be almost impossible.

3:35 PM

GG sent

Just this moment I responded to your earlier writings on your wall.

3:37 PM

GG sent

It is still not clear if you leave any room open for an omnipotent God who rewards and punishes accordingly.

Again it is okay to say that you are an atheist.

Besides I’m more interested to know if you think the pricing of all the monies including Cryptos is as price fixed as the minerals market?

3:43 PM

Corran

Normally I’d engage in a god discussion with glee, but I don’t have the time for it right now

FYI I did tell you I’d finally seen the reply

3:54 PM

GG sent

That reply, as I said, was not here, but on your fb wall.

So you have no questions.

Btw, I see no point in a God discussion with you, unless you say you are not an atheist.

Again, more interesting from a content aspect is your knowledge of the German-SA Oppenheimers, and how old were you when you realized they owned all the political parties in South Africa as well as price fixed the global minerals market.

Now that you have answered my question of reading my response to Honig, below is my communication to him:

From: Gary Gevisser <garystevengevisser@gmail.com>

Date: February 3, 2025 at 2:45:20 PM PST

To: dhonig@hallrender.com

Subject: Do you recognize the man on the right?

Gary

Ref: https://mckinneylaw.iu.edu/news/releases/2018/07/iu-mckinney-adjunct-professor-comments-on-us-china-trade-war-for-npr-pbs-msnbc.html

Sent from my iPhone

unknown_1.jpg

IU McKinney Adjunct Professor Comments on U.S. China trade war for NPR, PBS, MSNBC: Law School News: Robert H. McKinney School of Law: IUPUI

David B. Honig, an adjunct professor at IU Robert H. McKinney School of Law and an attorney with Hall, Render, Killian, Heath & Lyman, P.C., was interviewed recently on three different national media outlets.

4:04 PM

GG sent

Bear in mind, I didn’t need Elon Musk’s no fool father to let me know that I was on the right track.

His precise bombing 100 words of praise is of course that much more disturbing to those who think they know everything.

Imagine everyone you know following our dialogue.

It is of course content that you won’t find anywhere else.

Do you think either Zuckerberg or Elon Musk have heard of me and are paying close attention to all those distracting.

Remember, when you have the time, to share your formal education, and to include what makes you an expert in history.

4:05 PM

GG sent

I’m now heading on a mountain bike ride on this most perfect day for such a ride.

There is no rush.

Loading