Hey Barfo!

http://www.blacknewsweekly.com/201.html

Belafonte won't back down from Powell House ****** reference

[video=youtube;rdVjrBY5-F0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdVjrBY5-F0[/video]

 

LOL

The CoE slapped Rangel on the wrist after finding him guilty of 11 counts of assorted crimes. Congress shouldn't be investigating itself with such weak sauce, the Department of Justice should be investigating and bringing these kinds of charges against the criminals we elect in courts. No censures, just good honest jail time.

You might remember that Alberto Gonzalez lost his job as head of DoJ (Attorney General) because the DoJ was investigating republicans far more than democrats. How does a republican controlled DoJ investigating republicans for crimes fit in your picture of things?

 

Sure, and you might remember that Uranus is made of bleu cheese.

barfo

 

Where's Tom DeLay these days?

Anyhow, it didn't help that Pelosi made all those promises (repeatedly) and let Jefferson (the guy with the bundle of cash in his freezer) have a committee chairmanship - after it was known he was a crook.

 

Hey barfo

http://dailycaller.com/2010/11/18/gm-selling-at-a-loss-should-tell-you-something/

When a government sells stock in a company, it is usually trying to maximize short-term revenue. Therefore, the share price is normally pegged at what the market will bear. If the valuation of the total stock offering is less than the value of the company (or a portion thereof) being sold, something is amiss. That is certainly the case with the initial public offering of GM stock sold to investors on November 17. The stock price is telling us something the federal government doesn’t want to admit, all the rhetoric about the supposed success of the GM bailout notwithstanding.

...

If the federal government wanted to recoup its investment in GM, then the GM stock price should be much higher than the $33 initial price. In order to break even, as the Deal Journal reports, the stock price would have to rise to around $50 per share. So why is the Treasury Department selling off the company at a loss?

First, the government is what is known as a “motivated seller.” By offering such a low stock price, the administration is essentially admitting that it has no place in running an auto company. While GM’s financial position is much better than it was when it should have gone bankrupt, the company’s finances are not great. A quick crunch of any of the numbers in the GM prospectus shows the company is not the healthy organization the politicos would have you believe. They have done a poor job running the company, even if they did save it from going under by ignoring the law and throwing billions of dollars at it. The sale prospectus even admits “our (that is, the government’s) disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting are currently not effective.” Hardly a ringing endorsement!

Second, they’re not the only ones in the game. The unusual bankruptcy settlement for GM granted a significant portion of the company to the United Auto Workers. The union is in this game too, even though it has no investment to recoup. The UAW is selling around 18 million shares, so it stands to gain about $500 million for its pension fund — at taxpayers’ expense.

Finally, just as with RailTrack, there is considerable political risk involved. If the feds could nationalize GM once, they can do it again. The company admits in its prospectus that “The UST [U.S. Treasury] (or its designee) will continue to own a substantial interest in us following this offering, and its interests may differ from those of our other stockholders.” It suggests that government might interfere in “The selection, tenure and compensation of our management; our business strategy and product offerings; our relationship with our employees, unions and other constituencies; and our financing activities, including the issuance of debt and equity securities.” Furthermore, the government has asserted sovereign immunity, meaning that the IPO is not subject to anti-fraud laws.

 

And this one is so true it's funny. Or is it so funny it's true?

http://www.theonion.com/articles/department-of-education-study-finds-teaching-these,18461/

WASHINGTON—The U.S. Department of Education released a comprehensive, nationwide evaluation of American schools Monday indicating that attempts to teach absolutely anything to these little shits is just a huge waste of everybody's time.

"We remain committed to providing every student in the country with access to a high-quality education," said Education Secretary Arne Duncan, adding that good schools are a key component to the success of American democracy. "But to be honest, none of that matters. We're not talking about promising young scholars here—we're talking about a bunch of fucking animals."

"We've basically flushed $11,000 down the toilet for every single one of these little bastards," Duncan continued. "Not to mention 18 years of my life."

 

This strikes me as a deeply confused piece of writing. The answer to why $33 and not $50 is that $33 is what the market will bear. Duh.
The assertion in the first paragraph that the government is selling for less than the company is worth is not supported anywhere in the article.
Nor does he acknowledge that the plan all along was for there to be an IPO as soon as possible, and for the government to sell off its stake as quickly as possible.
Instead he acts like the government bought GM in order to make a profit, and it is thus suspicious that they are selling for less than they paid.
And, of course, it contains the obligatory misleading bash-the-union paragraph, where he pretends, as so many people do, that the union got their stake for free.

barfo

 

What did the union give up to get their $500M for selling a fraction of their ownership?

The article links to this one as support (among others):
http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2010/11/11/win-for-washington-gm-ipo-may-price-at-30-or-higher/

At $30 a share for the IPO, the stock would have to rise 67% to about $50 for the U.S. government to break even on the $50 billion it spent to bailout the auto maker.

 

half of their pension trust fund

Again, breaking even is not the goal here. Returning GM to private ownership is the goal.

barfo

 

It was already privately owned.

Anyhow, looks to me like the union has a nice $500M fund to invest in candidates next election cycle.

 

It was bankrupt. Now it's not.

The union pension trust fund has a nice $500M, not the union itself.

barfo

 

The entire pension was about $5B, most of it solvent. The government could have guaranteed that and saved $60B.

 

No, that's not anywhere close to correct.

barfo

 

Was. Is.

http://www.thestar.com/article/471472

GM's pension plans in the U.S. have a stronger funding than plans for its foreign operations, including Canada. The company took steps in 2003 to eliminate a $19 billion shortfall by selling a subsidiary and raising $18.5 billion by selling bonds to outside investors. GM has reported to shareholders the plans had 22 per cent more assets than benefit obligations at the end of 2007, while non-U.S. plans were 44 per cent short of funds, based on accounting rules that differ somewhat from actuarial reports.

 

Too bad GM is responsible for all of its operations, not just the US.

barfo

 

So the US government is responsible for Canadian (and other) citizens' pensions?

Wow.

 

No, GM is responsible for the pensions.

barfo