zlacker

>>giveme+(OP)
> the government made an $8.9 billion investment in Intel common stock, purchasing 433.3 million shares at a price of $20.47 per share, giving it a 10% stake in the company

> The United States paid nothing for these Shares, and the Shares are now valued at approximately $11 Billion Dollars

I don't understand. Can somebody explain to me how the government made an investement, bought shares, but paid nothing?

>>MyOutf+V6
The answer is in the paragraph in between the two you quoted from. The money for the purchase has already been appropriated by Congress and awarded to Intel. The awards didn't previously have this giant string attached where Intel gives stock in return. But now they do.

And it makes sense that Intel is spinning it as a generous investment from the gov't, but the gov't is spinning it as a free gift from Intel. Neither account really paints the full picture, but each one paints themselves as coming out ahead.

>>cvoss+z8
> Can somebody explain to me how the government made an investement, bought shares, but paid nothing?

Extortion.

Recent Supreme Court decisions have permitted the government to unilaterally cancel disbursements, even in flagrant violation of the plain text of law, impervious to preliminary injunctions, and then put up procedural hurdles to significantly increase the cost of reaching a final judgment in favor of the plaintiff. See, e.g., the most recent decisions issued this week in National Institutes of Health v. American Public Health Assn.: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/relatingtoorders/24

So presumably the administration's deal was, give us what we ask for and you'll get the money Congress awarded, or don't and wait 1-2 years for any case to wind its way through the courts.