Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 44 of 44

Thread: Michigan AG to defend Public Pensions in bankruptcy

  1. #41
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-17 @ 02:13 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,127

    Re: Michigan AG to defend Public Pensions in bankruptcy

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    So in your opinion what is the magic number?
    Depends on what you are looking for. 15 to 20% is okay, 10 to 15% is great when dealing with pension costs. The two major costs in Detroit's budget is wages and pensions, roughly 52% of the budget. Wages could be cut by 2 or 3%, as in no increases because firing people cost more in the long run. Having Pension pay outs cut of 5% would help as well. That's 8% in savings which isn't gonna "kill anyone". Then throw on bond cuts or renegotiation and you could save up to another 10%.

    So 18% in total budget savings or roughly $400 - $450 million. This covers the short fall and leaves them in then black by $50 to $100 million. That's money into a rainy day fund or to clean up neighborhoods which brings people back.
    Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats. It is inaccurate to say that I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of common sense, common honesty, and common decency. This makes me forever ineligible for public office. H.L Mencken

  2. #42
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-17 @ 02:13 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,127

    Re: Michigan AG to defend Public Pensions in bankruptcy

    Quote Originally Posted by occam's razor View Post
    sure, on the books you couldn't enter it any other way. It's still a failure. You can spin it any way you want. Not bonus worthy. The fact that you display that arrogant and aloof justification shows a truly disconnected rational.
    I am giving contractual and law definition. Change that first then call me arrogant and aloof.

    Quote Originally Posted by occam's razor View Post
    So saving a life means nothing unless they are unscathed? A person paralyzed in a wreck, but pulled out before burned to death isn't a save... Gotcha! You are truly twisted.
    And this gets into philosophy which is something rather pointless but do you know that person wants to live paralyzed? I think it's truly twisted to justify saving someone for the sake of saving someone despite you have know prior knowledge A) they want to be saved and B) their quality of live is equal or better prior to the saving.

    Doctor's have a do no harm clause. If someone is dying of cancer they don't poke and prod them for the sake of trying to save them but rather they give them palliative care.


    Quote Originally Posted by occam's razor View Post
    How about all the vendors and suppliers, the small, often privately held companies that support local economies? Did the execs get to keep their jobs? Save! Are they once again accruing stock options? Yup! Do they stand to make more from the new stock options than the old ones? Yes.
    Vendors and Supplier which have 12% less employees then they did in 2008? Hmm.. GM execs lost all stock from pre-2009. The stock options they are getting today are the new stock (issued in 2010 at $33 a share) which are fixed options at the strike price for the day of payment. Today the stock is trading at $36. So everything issued from 2010 to 2013 to GM execs is not a real money maker.

    Ford on the other hand which didn't get a bailout who was trading at a low of $5 a share in 2008 is trading at $17 a share today.. That's 300% return.



    Quote Originally Posted by occam's razor View Post
    You are profoundly myopic.
    To be myopic requires one not to see the big picture such as bailing out anybody does cause moral hazard and this isn't the first or last time the US auto industry (GM) will be bailed out again or the fact GM stock will have to trade at $90 something a share for the US Government to break even.



    Quote Originally Posted by occam's razor View Post
    Only in matters of interstate commerce. Fed does not trump states on matters not enumerated within the constitution. Sorry, dead wrong.
    Seriously? Check out Article 1, Section 8.. you'll find this little dandy in there..

    To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States

    Immigration is an undisputed Federal issue and so is Bankruptcy.

    Game, Set, Match.
    Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats. It is inaccurate to say that I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of common sense, common honesty, and common decency. This makes me forever ineligible for public office. H.L Mencken

  3. #43
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    10-10-15 @ 01:31 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,069
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Michigan AG to defend Public Pensions in bankruptcy

    Quote Originally Posted by austrianecon View Post
    I am giving contractual and law definition. Change that first then call me arrogant and aloof.
    You can speak legally all you want... I'll call it what it is. Anyone that needs to shield their morality (or lack thereof) behind a law, has no morality worth speaking of. Law is not morality... it's justice... and there is an ocean of difference. It is the definition of arrogant and aloof. Again, I call it what it is.

    GM execs lost all stock from pre-2009. The stock options they are getting today are the new stock (issued in 2010 at $33 a share) [/QUOTE]


    These were all stock options. Part of a BONUS package. They invested NOTHING

    Now, the new conservative bat to swing is "merit". Let people get payed according to their merit. These are not victims, they are the primary reason the stock lost 90% of it's value... and even then they cashed in. I can't think of a better award for that merit than to lose all of it. And guess what? Now they get reissued stock worth only 1% less than the former issues peek. Pretty freakin sweet deal if you ask me.

    despite you have know prior knowledge A) they want to be saved and B) their quality of live
    1st in bold... is this legalese? Second.... are you high? What kind of grammar is that?

    You're a eugenicist aren't you?

    Tell you what... let's spare them the agony of burning alive first... then let them decide from there.

  4. #44
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-17 @ 02:13 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,127

    Re: Michigan AG to defend Public Pensions in bankruptcy

    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Razor View Post
    You can speak legally all you want... I'll call it what it is. Anyone that needs to shield their morality (or lack thereof) behind a law, has no morality worth speaking of. Law is not morality... it's justice... and there is an ocean of difference. It is the definition of arrogant and aloof. Again, I call it what it is.
    Morality is subjective and useless without consensus. Thus law is what is acceptable to the "majority" of people and those we trust to define it. Meaning the people find that law or way of business is morally okay.

    Law doesn't equal Justice. Law only equals what is morally acceptable at that very moment in time. All you have to do is look at Civil Rights, Human Rights and such to see this.


    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Razor View Post
    These were all stock options. Part of a BONUS package. They invested NOTHING.
    I never said they invested anything. Stock Options are payment packages. Bonuses aren't this or that. Most bonuses are given despite performance. These aren't bonuses but rather total salary. It's bit of a black art of figure out what's a real bonus and what's described as a bonus do to legalese. Couple of examples:

    You can have incentive pay that a CEO is given short term goals to reach by the Board. It's not a "bonus" but it's counted as a bonus because it's only paid when those goals are reached.
    or
    You can have incentive pay based on long term goals. These types of bonuses are stock awards and option awards.

    GM's Daniel Akerson and Edward Whitarce took their positions after Bankruptcy. They had certain goals given to them by US Government and the Board. They met those goals. So they got stock options (it's know as stock salary) as incentive pay. That put their salaries for the year around $9 million.



    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Razor View Post
    Now, the new conservative bat to swing is "merit". Let people get payed according to their merit. These are not victims, they are the primary reason the stock lost 90% of it's value... and even then they cashed in. I can't think of a better award for that merit than to lose all of it. And guess what? Now they get reissued stock worth only 1% less than the former issues peek. Pretty freakin sweet deal if you ask me.
    First off.. GM cleaned house of it's top executives during bankruptcy. So the people getting issued stock salary weren't there in 2000-2008. But you can try and blur the lines.

    I never said they were victims and secondly, I never said anything about merit. I am talking about performance and stock salary (which is salary, not a bonus). I have no problem with them losing it all just as long as you think everybody in the company should as well.



    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Razor View Post
    1st in bold... is this legalese? Second.... are you high? What kind of grammar is that?
    Nah, my screw up.. I was dog tired by the time I got to this crap.

    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Razor View Post
    You're a eugenicist aren't you?
    Nah, I am not a liberal.


    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Razor View Post
    Tell you what... let's spare them the agony of burning alive first... then let them decide from there.
    You can save them from agony many different ways then saving them. Lame horses are put down all the time. Pets are euthanized and in some states it's legal in the US for Doctor's to give drugs to patients to kill themselves. Doctors also have to respect the wishes of people who have DNRs or a family's wish to pull the plug (so to speak).

    So "saving" is subjective.
    Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats. It is inaccurate to say that I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of common sense, common honesty, and common decency. This makes me forever ineligible for public office. H.L Mencken

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •