March 12, 2002

5:44 PM

Scientists will tell you that Hydrogen is the most common element in all of nature. Me, I think the scientists have it all wrong. I think the universe is really made out of irony
posted by BentPenguin (9 comments total)

beautiful. god bless america.
posted by rhizome23 at 5:50 PM on March 12, 2002

How does buying a companies stock benefit the company? They don't get any of the money.
posted by phatboy at 5:56 PM on March 12, 2002

i'm pretty ignorant as far as stocks and such are concerned, but it was my understanding that:
companies get money when they issue more stock, and if their stock is doing well (ie people are buying it), it becomes easier/more viable to do that. the money they get doesn't go straight into their pockets, but it allows expansion which in turn theoretically leads to increased profits.
posted by juv3nal at 6:20 PM on March 12, 2002

Furthermore, if the company has issued stock but held some for itself (or bought some of it back, which often happens when the price is lower than the original issue price), it can actualy make money when the stock goes up. This is a nice way to multiply your revenue if you're a corporation.

I would be shocked if any major corporation didn't own a sizable number of its own shares.
posted by kindall at 6:23 PM on March 12, 2002

Or according to all those computer games, someone can own 50.01% on your Co. and take over!
posted by jmd82 at 6:41 PM on March 12, 2002

So let me get this straight: the states make the prudent investment choice of investing in index funds (which, by the way, over any given 5 year period outperform more than 90% of managed funds and which have an annual expense rate that is a fraction of what managed funds cost), and you want to criticize the states because pennies out of each dollar goes to tobacco companies? Would you rather the state invest in a more expensive and higher risk stock fund just to claim the moral high ground? How much are you willing to have your state lose in the quest to avoid tobacco stocks?

Sorry folks, I just can't fault a state for making sound investment choices to maximize the revenue stream from the tobacco settlement.
posted by Lokheed at 7:12 PM on March 12, 2002

C'mon! You all didn't think that anti-tobacco bullshit was about something as prosaic as people's health, did you? Really? You were aware, no, that it was spearheaded by politicians and lawyers???

It's been two years since the tobacco settlement. What'd your health insurance premium do this year? :)
posted by UncleFes at 8:39 PM on March 12, 2002

What have you got against trial lawyers working for the paltry sum of $500/hour to take down the tobacco companies? How noble of them to protect us from ourselves.

That story is actually pretty hilarious. Maybe they're doing it so the entire industry doesn't go under, which would be bad. On the other hand, this sets a horrible precedent, the government investing in private corporations, having a controlling interest (not that they don't now, but it's only a legal interest). This would call into question the ability for the government to provide equal protection under the law for all. Of course, our system is so screwed up, that corporations pay lobbyists a million dollars a year to grab their piece of the corporate welfare pie, or to just stave off the attempts by the government to tax their businesses out of existence.

There must be some profit-motivated reasons for these companies to be so involved in politics.... this is a systemic problem, and I think this case provides a good example. How much do you want to bet that tobacco lobbyists had something to do with this investment plan? And no, you can't stop lobbying, not with any legislation, so don't even bother trying.
posted by insomnyuk at 9:46 PM on March 12, 2002

How does buying a companies stock benefit the company? They don't get any of the money.

Don't do crack, son. It's a ghetto drug.
posted by bingo at 10:56 PM on March 12, 2002