Dow Breaks 10,000!!! Damn that Obama!!!!

@realjohnboy,

Quote:

Limitations of treasury stock
Treasury stock does not pay a dividend
Treasury stock has no voting rights
Total treasury stock can not exceed the maximum proportion of total capitalization specified by law in the relevant country
When shares are repurchased, they may either be canceled or held for reissue. If not canceled, such shares are referred to as treasury shares. Technically, a repurchased share is a company's own share that has been bought back after having been issued and fully paid.

The possession of treasury shares does not give the company the right to vote, to exercise pre-emptive rights as a shareholder, to receive cash dividends, or to receive assets on company liquidation. Treasury shares are essentially the same as unissued capital and no one advocates classifying unissued share capital as an asset on the balance sheet, as an asset should have probable future economic benefits. Treasury shares simply reduce ordinary share capital.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasury_stock

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

It shows up on the balance sheet as "common stock held in treasury". If the company is authorized to issue X shares and it has issued X-Y, then Y is in the treasury and can be used by the company without getting further approval to issue stock. If you look at a financial statement it usually shows up as a negative value under the Shareholders' Equity section.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

Back in 1980 my dad and I bought a piece of real estate on Main St in Cville, VA, where our store still is located. $80K. In a bit of a scruffy part of town between downtown and UVA. Now "midtown" as we have branded the six block area, is ripe for development. But the property is still on our books as an $80K asset! I'm working with a hotel group where I (and my kin) would get a 40% share in exchange for the land - listed on the balance sheet at $80K.
Doesn't make much sense does it?
The tax hit if it were sold outright would be a killer. Enter the $200/hour tax lawyers.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

Foofie wrote:
And, who does the higher stock market benefit? The unemployed?

Yes.

Companies are better capitalized, which means they can start growing and hiring again.

They first have to give back the 40 hour week to those workers that were put on part-time salary. Rehiring will be awhile according to many pundits. Or, the better capitalization could be used to outsource to foreign shores!

0 Replies

@engineer,

Whew! We got through Treasury Stock. Imagine that.

0 Replies

What we need are rational and stable markets. what this latest phase of the see-saw shows is that we are not there yet. Pardon me for refraining from cheering.

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

If they bought another company's stock it would show as an asset, correct?

If they buy their own stock, it shows as an asset.

But since they still have to pay for their own stock, another asset would have to go down.

0 Replies

I remember cjhsa making a big deal of the Dow dropping the day after Obama was elected. I wonder what that stupid f@ckwit would make of the current rise!?!

1 Reply

@Wilso,

Don't know about cjhsa, but I would make exceedingly large bonus payouts to the people making the dow rise. Perhaps 100-150 Billion dollars in bonus money. I mean, the government has done nothing to get regulations into place, gave investment brokers a trillion dollars to gamble with and now look! The Dow is over 10,000!!! Woohoo!

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

Don't know about cjhsa, but I would make exceedingly large bonus payouts to the people making the dow rise. Perhaps 100-150 Billion dollars in bonus money. I mean, the government has done nothing to get regulations into place, gave investment brokers a trillion dollars to gamble with and now look! The Dow is over 10,000!!! Woohoo!

Maybe you'll think about what it took to get it to rise next time you decide to elect some dribbling moron like your little bum chum the shrub.

1 Reply

@Wilso,

Wilso wrote:

Maybe you'll think about what it took to get it to rise next time you decide to elect some dribbling moron like your little bum chum the shrub.

Is that english? Translation please.

1 Reply

How's the national debt doing?

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Ask Bush . . . he's the one who f*cked the nation without a condom . . .

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Ask Bush . . . he's the one who f*cked the nation without a condom . . .

Irrelevant. Not an answer.

0 Replies

I'm not obliged to answer your tendentious questions, clown. And i'm entitled to point out the hypocrisy of conservatives who are so eager to blame Mr. Obama for a situation which he did not create, but with which he is now obliged to deal. It's very relevant indeed.

1 Reply

@realjohnboy,

Because your dad decided to not list it as its current value on his balance sheet doesn't relate to the real world being required to do that. Businesses including small businesses often revalue assets based on the current value. If your father wanted to borrow money it would be easy for him to revalue the asset and then use that as collateral on a loan.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

I'm not obliged to answer your tendentious questions, clown. And i'm entitled to point out the hypocrisy of conservatives who are so eager to blame Mr. Obama for a situation which he did not create, but with which he is now obliged to deal. It's very relevant indeed.

My impression is that the National Debt is getting much worse. Unless you have something to say which is relevant to that, I will consider your post to be nothing more than a distraction.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

The debt is getting worse because the government has reduced revenues because of a recession and because the government is deficit spending like they should during a recession to help mitigate its effect.

Since the main cause of the increase in debt is the recession it seems rather silly to argue that we can't discuss the recession and it's causes in talking about the debt.

1 Reply

@parados,

We should expect the debt to get better during good times and worse during bad times. Reagan dramatically (at the time) increased deficit spending during bad times. Clinton dramatically decreased deficit spending during good times. Bush had a generally good economy, but had a war in progress and that distorts the numbers significantly (although I have made the arguement in the past that Bush should have pushed for a war tax so that all Americans could contribute to the war effort and control the deficit.) Obama's deficit spending is consistent with the country's economic challenges. Let's see what he does in 2010-11 with a better economy.

0 Replies

It was precisely because Mr. Bush pursued the idiotic conservative mantra of reducing taxes (primarily for those who could have best done without the tax reduction, and to the detriment of those who could best have benefited from a tax reduction which they didn't get) when the economy was slumping after September 11th, and then while waging an unnecessary war begun on dubious grounds and the cost of which was needlessly increased by grafting by favored corporations that the national debt increased so dramatically. And almost none of it was necessary.

0 Replies

Dow Breaks 10,000!!! Damn that Obama!!!!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know