SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (13668)9/15/2003 6:51:49 PM
From: Lizzie TudorRead Replies (1) of 306849
 
you know what I have been wondering about lately... whether laws that are passed that require certain minimum % approval for laws to pass in the future are constitutional. Doesn't seem like it, actually.

Say I pass a law today that says my law can only be overturned with 90% of the vote in the future. Doesn't sound legal, it gives the prior voters a larger stake in the future than they should have. Just a thought.

Re: options. I think I said to you once before, that I would support options expensing if a method was proposed that accurately reflected the "cost" to the company. The proposals on the table, which involve black-scholes do not in any way reflect true cost and any forensic evaluation of options expensing using these methods and companies like Cisco prove that easily. Just find a reasonable approach, where options expenses applied during the 90s proved to be true representations of cost. I think you'll be disappointed with the results though, most options these days granted to the rank and file are worthless. So these should result in *no* cost to the company in an accurate options expensing proposal. Not the millions black scholes estimates which later have to be backed out.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext