Happy Sunday by the way! This is not meant to be a divisive thread but a lot of conservatives uneasy about this one.
I recall a fed bailout of Gm and Chrysler in 2008, $80 Billion.
Who is Edwin Landy and why should anyone care what his opinion is? This is your typical stirring the pot non-sense
Your TDS is showing again.
You are one of the most ignorant people on FR. Maybe if you studied history and civics you might not make such an ass of yourself all the time.
The only good I can see coming out of this is if it’s challenged and it leads to getting government investment out of other businesses. Like whatever the Federal Reserve is invested in.
INTEL
Ownership:
The 10 largest shareholders of Intel as of December 2023 were:[241]
The Vanguard Group (9.12% of shares)
BlackRock (8.04%)
State Street (4.45%)
Capital International (2.29%)
Geode Capital Management (2.01%)
Primecap (1.78%)
Capital Research Global Investors (1.63%)
Morgan Stanley (1.18%)
Norges Bank (1.14%)
Northern Trust (1.05%)
I’d rather this than let China be controlling how some of our chips are made - better than the old “Cash for Clunkers”
There is precedent from auto bailouts where stock was acquired to “help them out” and eventually sold. No permanent stake was kept. That was never tried in court so legality is debatable.
Nevertheless, I don’t agree that bailout was in line with the intent of the Constitution, nor do I think this Intel thing is.
I also don’t like “crony capitalism” where government sets laws and regulations that benefit some companies but not others, yet this is “legal”.
I also don’t like flat out corruption where companies are given grants and they basically do nothing but go bankrupt (green scams), yet this is “legal”.
I have no problem with government putting out RFPs where multiple companies bid to provide the product or service.
I have no problem for the relatively rare circumstance where only one company can actually provide the particular product or service in a timely way so they are awarded over and over (e.g. Skunkworks)
I have no problem w/government giving grants for research.
I have no problem w/government giving loans that are paid back.
Nevertheless, all the things I “approve of “ can be abused, which I don’t like.
To me, what’s most in line constitutionally, would be to cut the outlandish statutes and regulations that make operating in the US non-competitive. That’s what’s driving business overseas. Until that’s straightened out (which it probably never will be) tariffs can help adjust for that.
The constitution is great. Communism, socialism, fascism, totalitarianism, and authoritarianism are terrible.
We have a little bit of each terrible thing going on in the US today.
The Intel thing is just the latest and falls in the fascist bucket. Hopefully, they’ll sell the shares soon.
In the meantime:
Is anyone going to be casting the votes with that 10%, and if so, who is it, and how will they vote, the next time a voting issue comes to the Board?
What happens to the stock value of other US chip manufacturers like AMD, XiLinx, and Texas Instruments?
Is someone in government going to propose certain backdoors in chips to help spy on the American public?
Its not illegal. Read up before you start spewing this stuff.
Our national security must be taken into top consideration.
performance of grant objectives
Is not control of stock one way to incentivize the objectives?
There's no case unless Trump actually withheld the money, unless you want to argue extortion. But then it was not extortion on his behalf, since he's not personally benefitting. So it's hard to argue for extortion.
Plus the Intel execs were probably happy to give the shares since it propped up Intel's share prices, from which they would benefit personally.
Unlawful or the bully pulpit?
If you want to argue the US gov should not own shares, that horse left the barn a long time ago with subsidized loans, "green" grants and NGO funding that were recycled to the Dem party, etc., etc. Trump has learned that if you walk away from the game because its corrupt, you still forfeit.