Nortel & the sale of gov't-backed assets.
Nortel & the sale of gov't-backed assets.
Questions on the Cabinet's role in approving sales of Canadian-based assets would be moot if past-Cabinets had taken an "equity stake" in Nortel, Inco, Stelco, de Havailand, Algoma, Bomdardier, etc etc (ad naseum) when those gov'ts made their "stimulative investments" in these same firms.
If the past gov'ts of Canada, as stewards of the operating statement & balance sheet of the country ON BEHALF OF THE CITIZENS, had become a stock and/or bond holder in exchange for the tax-money granted these firms, then their would be no question that the gov't had a right to "vote" on any disposition of that firm's assets.
Why did the USA and Canada take an equity stake in GM & Chrysler (this time) and never before?
If the promise is that the citizenry WILL realise on their investment when the gov't's position is sold back to the open market .... why didn't we do this all along?
Respectfully (puzzled)
rce
Questions on the Cabinet's role in approving sales of Canadian-based assets would be moot if past-Cabinets had taken an "equity stake" in Nortel, Inco, Stelco, de Havailand, Algoma, Bomdardier, etc etc (ad naseum) when those gov'ts made their "stimulative investments" in these same firms.
If the past gov'ts of Canada, as stewards of the operating statement & balance sheet of the country ON BEHALF OF THE CITIZENS, had become a stock and/or bond holder in exchange for the tax-money granted these firms, then their would be no question that the gov't had a right to "vote" on any disposition of that firm's assets.
Why did the USA and Canada take an equity stake in GM & Chrysler (this time) and never before?
If the promise is that the citizenry WILL realise on their investment when the gov't's position is sold back to the open market .... why didn't we do this all along?
Respectfully (puzzled)
rce
posted by Walk a Kb or Two in my cassins | 8:16 am
|
0 comments
