3 ms·
The "or else' isn't the problem. The problem is the government trying to get involved in the first place. Intel was not forced to give away 10% of their company
by Sparyjerry 1y ago
The "or else' isn't the problem. The problem is the government trying to get involved in the first place. Intel was not forced to give away 10% of their company for 10 billion dollars, they simply wanted the 10 billion dollars. It's the fault of our government for propping up failing companies. Intel should be dying instead.
- thaumasiotes 1y agoIntel may well have wanted to donate some ownership more than it wanted 10 billion dollars. They are now in a position to argue forever that what's good for Intel is good for the federal government.
- re-thc 1y ago> They are now in a position to argue forever that what's good for Intel is good for the federal government What does that even give you? They can argue all they want. Doesn't mean the government will listen.
- thaumasiotes 1y agoIt's a fairly routine practice for business owners to let local politicians invest in their business. Why do you think that is?
- re-thc 1y ago> fairly routine practice for business owners to let local politicians invest in their business Let? Like this 1? Where if you don't we threaten to fire the CEO and take over the company otherwise? Are you sure it is let? > local politicians Is 1 or more individuals. In this instance it is "the government" as an entity. Not the same?
- thaumasiotes 1y agoFirst think about why it happens, and then decide whether you think this is the same.
- re-thc 1y agoSo if I decide so it’s true? I don’t get where you’re going with your comments?
- thaumasiotes 1y agoWhatever you decide is, by definition, what you believe is true. You don't seem to be particularly skilled at accurately determining what's true, but there's not much I can do about that other than providing the advice I've already given you.