Warren's Conditions for Bailouts

[dbackjon]

All Fantastic ideas. Too long companies have lied/cheated/stole/ignored all stakeholders other than short-term shareholders, then come running for a handout when times turn bad.

96% of Airline profits have gone to stock Buy backs.

We’re not writing blank checks to giant corporations. Any taxpayer dollars that go to help big businesses during the coronavirus crisis should come with the following minimum requirements:

1. Companies must maintain their payrolls and use funds to keep people working or on payroll.

2. Companies must provide a $15 minimum wage within one year of the national emergency declaration ending.

3. Companies are permanently prohibited from engaging in share repurchases.

4. Companies are prohibited from paying out dividends or executive bonuses while they are receiving any relief and for three years thereafter.

5. Companies must set aside at least one seat – but potentially two or more, as the amount of relief increases – on the board of directors for representatives elected by workers.

6. Collective bargaining agreements should remain in place and should not be reopened or renegotiated pursuant to this relief program.


7. Corporations must obtain shareholder and board approval for all political expenditures.

8. CEOs must be required to personally certify a company is in compliance and face criminal penalties for false certifications.

Congress must set up an oversight body, modeled on the Congressional Oversight Panel and the SIGTARP program for the bank bailout, but with real funding & subpoena power. We need real accountability to make sure these conditions are met.

[93henfan]

Fuck yeah. Screw the man!!

[CAA Flagship]

Fuck yeah. Screw the man!!

*white man

[AZGrizFan]

1. Companies must maintain their payrolls and use funds to keep people working or on payroll.

That's the only good idea on that list.

[Chizzang]

Man I hate it when there are rules tied to free money...
Shouldn't welfare have rules..?

I thought that as a Republican talking point?

[UNI88]

1. Companies must maintain their payrolls and use funds to keep people working or on payroll.

That's the only good idea on that list.

I'm alright with #4. If you go to the government with hat in hand for a taxpayer bailout you shouldn't be giving executive bonuses anytime soon after.

#5 has some merit. A workers' voice on the board could be a good thing if properly structured. Defined benefit retirement plans should be required to hold a percentage of company stock so that the workers have a vested interest in the success of the company. With that stock comes voting power.

Should companies be able to double dip by getting worker concessions after they've already received government welfare handouts (#6)?

#7 is just an backdoor attempt to give Kalm his wetdream.

And he forgot #9 - no checks whatsoever should be given to anyone who attended the University of Maine.

[∞∞∞]

Let them fail and nationalize all public transportation.

[BDKJMU]

Fuck yeah. Screw the man!!

*white man

*Pale Face..

[BDKJMU]

Let them fail and nationalize all public transportation.

Yeah, make them all like Amtrak. That will be efficient..

[Skjellyfetti]

Amtrak sucks because the freight companies own the railroads and they're second class citizen... have to wait for the freight trains... no high speed... etc.

[∞∞∞]

Let them fail and nationalize all public transportation.

Yeah, make them all like Amtrak. That will be efficient..

Dude, without government, airlines are probably less efficient than Amtrak if not completely insolvent.

The amount of built-in subsidies, tax breaks, and protections they get put the bank bailouts to shame. And even with all this, the execs and shareholders want taxpayers to put in even more money? Fuck 'em (and this is from someone who does work for airlines).

[Pwns]

We should put strings on how bailout money can be spent by corporations, but forcing them to make permanent changes to how they do business so they can survive a crisis they aren't responsible for isn't okay.

I'm amazed at the "corporations need us, we don't need them" attitude. Letting airlines and banks fail is going to have far-reaching consequences just like letting low-income people who are getting laid off fall on their asses will.

[CID1990]

I have zero problems with attaching strings to taxpayer money. We do it all the time to the States... it should be applied to corporations as well


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UNI88]

We should put strings on how bailout money can be spent by corporations, but forcing them to make permanent changes to how they do business so they can survive a crisis they aren't responsible for isn't okay.

I'm amazed at the "corporations need us, we don't need them" attitude. Letting airlines and banks fail is going to have far-reaching consequences just like letting low-income people who are getting laid off fall on their asses will.

Then they and all production can be taken over by the government. We'll have a fraction of the innovation and advancement but hey, we'll all be equally miserable as we wait in line for bread before going home to punish our liver with excessive amounts of vodka. Equal outcomes is more important then quality of living and advancing the human race.

[∞∞∞]

We should put strings on how bailout money can be spent by corporations, but forcing them to make permanent changes to how they do business so they can survive a crisis they aren't responsible for isn't okay.

I'm amazed at the "corporations need us, we don't need them" attitude. Letting airlines and banks fail is going to have far-reaching consequences just like letting low-income people who are getting laid off fall on their asses will.

Then they and all production can be taken over by the government. We'll have a fraction of the innovation and advancement but hey, we'll all be equally miserable as we wait in line for bread before going home to punish our liver with excessive amounts of vodka. Equal outcomes is more important then quality of living and advancing the human race.

Yeah you've got all of human history to draw from - with all forms of social and economic structures, including plenty of empires and world powers - and none were able to innovate and advance society before ~insert favorite system~ came along.

Literally any system can function efficiently and grow if that society works as a cohesive unit. And it's not like this is theory.

Don't take this as a knock on capitalism (or anything) either. I'm just saying that throughout humanity, plenty of different systems at the same points in history exist with equal results...whether it's monarchies and republics, capitalism and communism, or kingdoms and tribes. The one which outlasts the other isn't necessarily the superior system, just the one where more people continued believing in its merits.

But every society reaches a point where it becomes unwieldy and the differences too strong.

[Chizzang]

We should put strings on how bailout money can be spent by corporations, but forcing them to make permanent changes to how they do business so they can survive a crisis they aren't responsible for isn't okay.

Ah... yes
Spoken like somebody who wasn't forced to study The Great Depression and rule 10b-18

Stock buybacks were a large factor in sending America into an enormous crash 90 years ago
followed by rule 10b-18 / another Reagan era disaster come home to roost today
There used to be rather significant liabilities associated with stock buybacks
which protected the integrity of the stock market and American citizens

Ronald Reagan didn't know anything about the Stock Market
but his buddy and personal financial advisor was assigned head of the SEC
and from that point forward the SEC ceased to be a "regulatory body" and became a corporate promotional wing of Wall Street



read any one of these... https://hbr.org/search?term=william%20lazonick

also:
from a guy that understands Wall Street
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/18/mark-cu ... again.html

[CID1990]

Then they and all production can be taken over by the government. We'll have a fraction of the innovation and advancement but hey, we'll all be equally miserable as we wait in line for bread before going home to punish our liver with excessive amounts of vodka. Equal outcomes is more important then quality of living and advancing the human race.

Yeah you've got all of human history to draw from - with all forms of social and economic structures, including plenty of empires and world powers - and none were able to innovate and advance society before ~insert favorite system~ came along.

Literally any system can function efficiently and grow if that society works as a cohesive unit. And it's not like this is theory.

Don't take this as a knock on capitalism (or anything) either. I'm just saying that throughout humanity, plenty of different systems at the same points in history exist with equal results...whether it's monarchies and republics, capitalism and communism, or kingdoms and tribes. The one which outlasts the other isn't necessarily the superior system, just the one where more people continued believing in its merits.

But every society reaches a point where it becomes unwieldy and the differences too strong.

You take a technocratic view of economic and political systems - and there is nothing wrong with that as long as you are willing to include the human element and consider that human nature largely is driven by selfishness and power. There is no such thing as a successful large scale collective where humans are involved. It works for bees and ants and that’s about it.

Any system which centralizes power places it in fewer hands and then you wind up with autocracy. And yes, we witness a kind of corporate autocracy in America and we should be looking for ways to mitigate that. But a full on upheaval of our economic system is not the way - especially when it involves taking power from the few (corporate captains) and placing it in the hands of the other few - the government executive class


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CitadelGrad]

We should put strings on how bailout money can be spent by corporations, but forcing them to make permanent changes to how they do business so they can survive a crisis they aren't responsible for isn't okay.

Ah... yes
Spoken like somebody who wasn't forced to study The Great Depression and rule 10b-18

Stock buybacks were a large factor in sending America into an enormous crash 90 years ago
followed by rule 10b-18 / another Reagan era disaster come home to roost today
There used to be rather significant liabilities associated with stock buybacks
which protected the integrity of the stock market and American citizens

Ronald Reagan didn't know anything about the Stock Market
but his buddy and personal financial advisor was assigned head of the SEC
and from that point forward the SEC ceased to be a "regulatory body" and became a corporate promotional wing of Wall Street



read any one of these... https://hbr.org/search?term=william%20lazonick

also:
from a guy that understands Wall Street
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/18/mark-cu ... again.html

I wonder what makes stock buybacks such an attractive option for so many corporations. Could it possibly be the Fed inflating assets?

[kalm]

That's the only good idea on that list.

I'm alright with #4. If you go to the government with hat in hand for a taxpayer bailout you shouldn't be giving executive bonuses anytime soon after.

#5 has some merit. A workers' voice on the board could be a good thing if properly structured. Defined benefit retirement plans should be required to hold a percentage of company stock so that the workers have a vested interest in the success of the company. With that stock comes voting power.

Should companies be able to double dip by getting worker concessions after they've already received government welfare handouts (#6)?

#7 is just an backdoor attempt to give Kalm his wetdream.

And he forgot #9 - no checks whatsoever should be given to anyone who attended the University of Maine.

After reading these proposals...I'd back door that Indian princess gilf!

(If you know what I mean)

[Pwns]

We should put strings on how bailout money can be spent by corporations, but forcing them to make permanent changes to how they do business so they can survive a crisis they aren't responsible for isn't okay.

Ah... yes
Spoken like somebody who wasn't forced to study The Great Depression and rule 10b-18

Stock buybacks were a large factor in sending America into an enormous crash 90 years ago
followed by rule 10b-18 / another Reagan era disaster come home to roost today
There used to be rather significant liabilities associated with stock buybacks
which protected the integrity of the stock market and American citizens

Ronald Reagan didn't know anything about the Stock Market
but his buddy and personal financial advisor was assigned head of the SEC
and from that point forward the SEC ceased to be a "regulatory body" and became a corporate promotional wing of Wall Street



read any one of these... https://hbr.org/search?term=william%20lazonick

also:
from a guy that understands Wall Street
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/18/mark-cu ... again.html

But wouldn't that fall under telling companies how they use their bailout money?

[kalm]

Ah... yes
Spoken like somebody who wasn't forced to study The Great Depression and rule 10b-18

Stock buybacks were a large factor in sending America into an enormous crash 90 years ago
followed by rule 10b-18 / another Reagan era disaster come home to roost today
There used to be rather significant liabilities associated with stock buybacks
which protected the integrity of the stock market and American citizens

Ronald Reagan didn't know anything about the Stock Market
but his buddy and personal financial advisor was assigned head of the SEC
and from that point forward the SEC ceased to be a "regulatory body" and became a corporate promotional wing of Wall Street



read any one of these... https://hbr.org/search?term=william%20lazonick

also:
from a guy that understands Wall Street
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/18/mark-cu ... again.html

But wouldn't that fall under telling companies how they use their bailout money?

It’s like drug testing welfare recipients.

[Chizzang]

Ah... yes
Spoken like somebody who wasn't forced to study The Great Depression and rule 10b-18

Stock buybacks were a large factor in sending America into an enormous crash 90 years ago
followed by rule 10b-18 / another Reagan era disaster come home to roost today
There used to be rather significant liabilities associated with stock buybacks
which protected the integrity of the stock market and American citizens

Ronald Reagan didn't know anything about the Stock Market
but his buddy and personal financial advisor was assigned head of the SEC
and from that point forward the SEC ceased to be a "regulatory body" and became a corporate promotional wing of Wall Street



read any one of these... https://hbr.org/search?term=william%20lazonick

also:
from a guy that understands Wall Street
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/18/mark-cu ... again.html

But wouldn't that fall under telling companies how they use their bailout money?

No...
it's telling them one thing they CAN'T do with their free taxpayer money
which falls under "What's best for America"

Remember America

[SDHornet]

1. Companies must maintain their payrolls and use funds to keep people working or on payroll.

That's the only good idea on that list.

Agree. All the other items are politically driven Marxist ideals and have nothing to do with keeping people employed.

[SDHornet]

Let them fail and nationalize all public transportation.

Yeah, make them all like Amtrak. That will be efficient..

[GannonFan]

All Fantastic ideas. Too long companies have lied/cheated/stole/ignored all stakeholders other than short-term shareholders, then come running for a handout when times turn bad.

96% of Airline profits have gone to stock Buy backs.

We’re not writing blank checks to giant corporations. Any taxpayer dollars that go to help big businesses during the coronavirus crisis should come with the following minimum requirements:

1. Companies must maintain their payrolls and use funds to keep people working or on payroll.

2. Companies must provide a $15 minimum wage within one year of the national emergency declaration ending.

3. Companies are permanently prohibited from engaging in share repurchases.

4. Companies are prohibited from paying out dividends or executive bonuses while they are receiving any relief and for three years thereafter.

5. Companies must set aside at least one seat – but potentially two or more, as the amount of relief increases – on the board of directors for representatives elected by workers.

6. Collective bargaining agreements should remain in place and should not be reopened or renegotiated pursuant to this relief program.


7. Corporations must obtain shareholder and board approval for all political expenditures.

8. CEOs must be required to personally certify a company is in compliance and face criminal penalties for false certifications.

Congress must set up an oversight body, modeled on the Congressional Oversight Panel and the SIGTARP program for the bank bailout, but with real funding & subpoena power. We need real accountability to make sure these conditions are met.

I'm in favor of putting conditions on government loans/handouts, but some of the above is really window dressing.
-The $15 minimum wage is not really that big of a deal for most corporations that would be asking for money - how many airline employees make under the minimum wage today? Probably very few.
- No share repurchases, ever? Corporations tend to be immortal, so are you honestly saying it's good economic principle to ban stock repurchases going out 300-500 years from now? I think putting a 10 year window on banning stock repurchases is fine. Make it 20 years if you want. Infinite is just silly talk. Share repurchases, per se, aren't bad things. Share repurchases right after a government bailout are different.
- The shareholder and board approval thing for all political expenditures is troublesome. What is a political expenditure? Can commercials or any other marketing every be fully considered to be not political? And when you have a political body (Congress) overseeing this I'm sure that will be a lightning rod going forward that won't always have a clear answer. Sounds great, but also sounds impossible to truly manage.