Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (11004)	2/6/2006 6:43:40 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 541582

and you suppose that it is not different You made a point of saying that the only difference was the form of the compensation. You made a point to say that the silver and fish were of equal value. If the fish couldn't be converted into silver, then they wouldn't be of equal value. DUH! <g>

To: TigerPaw who wrote (11004)	2/6/2006 6:58:06 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541582

How would things be different for an employee if her got is pay in company stock? How would it be more just? He would have to sell some of the stock or perhaps all of it, to meet current expenses or other desired investments. Maybe, just possibly a small amount would be left in stock that the employee might have spent if he had been paid in cash, but that is far from certain. And maybe the employee is less diversified, and so loses everything (his job and his investment) if his company fails. The commissions might make some difference but if you want to invest in something other than your companies stock you would have to pay more commissions if you originally got paid in stock (selling your stock and then buying, rather then just buying. Well of course if I have one difference in my example, and you suppose that it is not different, then of course the outcomes would be the same. DUH! Yes its different but it is of no significance. If I want stock I buy it, if I want more money and less stock, I sell some. The transaction is trivial. Its quick and easy. Why do you consider such an easy transaction to be a significant difference, and one so serious as to require a government mandate so that the employee doesn't have to make this easy transaction to get stock? Tim