Reasonable Republican wrote:
If trump took over in 2008 the Dow would be at like 40000 now if you go off how it’s grown in his first year.
Yeah you’re fvcking bright with that logic
Reasonable Republican wrote:
If trump took over in 2008 the Dow would be at like 40000 now if you go off how it’s grown in his first year.
Yeah you’re fvcking bright with that logic
Fat hurts wrote:
Trollminator wrote:
This is actually not a great time to be a corporate executive, from a wealth creation point of view. For example, executives who earn stock options as part of their pay packages are getting them locked in at all time high valuations... which is awful since most likely we will see a market correction soon enough so when they vest they might be exercisable at a significant margin above future prices (you want to exercise stocks at a strike price that is much lower than the market rate, not the other way around).
That's why a lot of companies, like mine, have switched from stock options to restricted stock units. RSU's are just ordinary shares that vest over time. There is no set exercise price. You just get the shares after vesting no matter the price. You don't do quite as well as options if the price went up, but at least you always make money, even if the price went down.
Options are good incentives for startups or super-fast growth companies. RSU's are better for mature companies.
Stock options are popular instruments for aligning compensation with long term performance.
Trollminator wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
That's why a lot of companies, like mine, have switched from stock options to restricted stock units. RSU's are just ordinary shares that vest over time. There is no set exercise price. You just get the shares after vesting no matter the price. You don't do quite as well as options if the price went up, but at least you always make money, even if the price went down.
Options are good incentives for startups or super-fast growth companies. RSU's are better for mature companies.
Stock options are popular instruments for aligning compensation with long term performance.
RSU's also align compensation with long term performance. But RSU's allow benefits to accrue even when a stock goes down.
Your point was that an overheated market is not good for corporate executives because it makes new stock options less valuable as an incentive. My point is that they just issue RSU's instead of options. If you enjoy the work, it's always a great time to be a corporate executive.
Morning Joe's Donny Deutsch came on the air after talking to his long time friend Michael Cohen.
Cohen had two quotes to pass along to the media:
1. "He (Giuliani) doesn’t know what he’s talking about."
2. "There’s two people that know exactly what happened, myself and the President and you’ll be hearing my side of the story."
That last part struck me as interesting. Cohen passes on word that, "you'll be hearing my side of the story."
Does that mean Cohen has already flipped?
Fat hurts wrote:
Morning Joe's Donny Deutsch came on the air after talking to his long time friend Michael Cohen.
Cohen had two quotes to pass along to the media:
1. "He (Giuliani) doesn’t know what he’s talking about."
2. "There’s two people that know exactly what happened, myself and the President and you’ll be hearing my side of the story."
That last part struck me as interesting. Cohen passes on word that, "you'll be hearing my side of the story."
Does that mean Cohen has already flipped?
No, I see this as Cohen pledging support for Trump. Trump now at 44.4% approval
Unreal
Fat hurts wrote:
Morning Joe's Donny Deutsch came on the air after talking to his long time friend Michael Cohen.
Cohen had two quotes to pass along to the media:
1. "He (Giuliani) doesn’t know what he’s talking about."
2. "There’s two people that know exactly what happened, myself and the President and you’ll be hearing my side of the story."
That last part struck me as interesting. Cohen passes on word that, "you'll be hearing my side of the story."
Does that mean Cohen has already flipped?
No.
Good morning! How are all you LRC stable geniuses doing this fine am?
A very stabIe genius! wrote:
Good morning! How are all you LRC stable geniuses doing this fine am?
Really quite well. Thanks for asking.
Trump's approval has been jumping over the last couple weeks, currently up to 44.4% in the RCP poll-of-polls. Highest since his first few months in office. This, despite constant attacks from the media on every statement he makes.
Then, tremendous news yesterday, as a federal judge finally calls out the Mueller charade for what it is: He "suggested they lied about the scope of the investigation, are seeking “unfettered power” and are more interested in bringing down the president." He said "they don't really care about Manafort", who's crimes were from up to a decade prior.
True, true, and true. And, now if they so desperately try to subpoena Trump, he has a leg to stand on in defending himself. There are supposedly many more judges outside of DC who would also agree with this statement.
ALSO, two of the FBI agents involved in the "Insurancy policy" conspiracy against Trump winning have resigned (one being Ms Lisa Page, of course). I don't see anything about this on CNN, which of course is hilarious. Nothing to see here, I guess.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/05/04/federal-judge-accuses-muellers-team-lying-trying-to-target-trump-cmon-man.htmlOh, and in case it wasn't already quite clear to everyone on LRC...
Mueller has nothing for which to come.
The clown steadfastly remains Flagpole.
As for the judge's comment that they are not concerned with Manafort, only Trump:
If Manafort committed crimes he should be prosecuted, right?
Regardless of anything to do with Trump.
The judge injected his own politics without looking solely at the case in front of him.
Manafort has done some bad things and should go down for them.
L L wrote:
As for the judge's comment that they are not concerned with Manafort, only Trump:
If Manafort committed crimes he should be prosecuted, right?
Regardless of anything to do with Trump.
The judge injected his own politics without looking solely at the case in front of him.
Manafort has done some bad things and should go down for them.
I don't have a problem with what this judge said. It's his job to determine if his court is the proper venue for a case and if the prosecutors have a right to bring such a case. The Mueller team is made up of experienced prosecutors. They are big boys. They can withstand a little scrutiny. It's healthy and it lends legitimacy to the investigation when it is fully, even mercilessly, checked by the courts.
The decided to offer a political opinion but will likely rule against Manafort.
Reasonable Republican wrote:
And with your corporate tax increases a lot of those people wouldn’t even have jobs. What’s your point?.
Failed assumption.
The laffer curve isn't what you dream it to be.
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
Reasonable Republican wrote:
And with your corporate tax increases a lot of those people wouldn’t even have jobs. What’s your point?.
Failed assumption.
The laffer curve isn't what you dream it to be.
I do not think that there is any question that corporate taxes can be set too high for the common good. I am not arguing that they are (or were) but certainly it is the case that there is a level X, somewhere at or above 0% and below 100%, above which we are in general worse off (and not just "the rich").
I have not seen anyone argue coherently what "X" is.
PIO! wrote:
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
Failed assumption.
The laffer curve isn't what you dream it to be.
I do not think that there is any question that corporate taxes can be set too high for the common good. I am not arguing that they are (or were) but certainly it is the case that there is a level X, somewhere at or above 0% and below 100%, above which we are in general worse off (and not just "the rich").
I have not seen anyone argue coherently what "X" is.
Don't backpedal!!! Your claim is any increase in corporate tax burden results in certain human misery.
What I find so comical about you trash talkers is as soon as we get into specifics you know bad policy when you see it, but won't ever lead with your convictions.
Good job conservative justice warrior.
Corporation are people, my friend!
Mitt R. wrote:
Corporation are people, my friend!
As much people as Scrooge.
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
PIO! wrote:
I do not think that there is any question that corporate taxes can be set too high for the common good. I am not arguing that they are (or were) but certainly it is the case that there is a level X, somewhere at or above 0% and below 100%, above which we are in general worse off (and not just "the rich").
I have not seen anyone argue coherently what "X" is.
Don't backpedal!!! Your claim is any increase in corporate tax burden results in certain human misery.
What I find so comical about you trash talkers is as soon as we get into specifics you know bad policy when you see it, but won't ever lead with your convictions.
Good job conservative justice warrior.
Perhaps you should check to see whom you are responding to prior to responding.
(I am assuming here that you have a reasonable level of reading comprehension skills such that the only reasonable explanation for your entirely inappropriate response is that you did not first check regarding the question of "whom". If in fact my assumption as to your reading comprehension level is not a reasonable one please let me know. In the meantime I will await your apology.)
Fat hurts wrote:
L L wrote:
As for the judge's comment that they are not concerned with Manafort, only Trump:
If Manafort committed crimes he should be prosecuted, right?
Regardless of anything to do with Trump.
The judge injected his own politics without looking solely at the case in front of him.
Manafort has done some bad things and should go down for them.
I don't have a problem with what this judge said. It's his job to determine if his court is the proper venue for a case and if the prosecutors have a right to bring such a case. The Mueller team is made up of experienced prosecutors. They are big boys. They can withstand a little scrutiny. It's healthy and it lends legitimacy to the investigation when it is fully, even mercilessly, checked by the courts.
I agree, and this in fact is part of our system of check and balances. In many ways, the principles on which that judge is ruling is the same as those being applied in the special counsel! So really, Fox News is praising the investigation!
Mitt R. wrote:
Corporation[s] are people, my friend!
No, they're persons. It's not just a semantic distinction, either.
Was being cool somewhere today all day, so just to keep everyone on track...
Mueller is coming.
The clown is done.