Accorn Supports Child ProstitutionFollow

I dunno, blow jobs seem pretty compelling.

That's why I said "politically". Never let it be said that I don't know my audience.

Zero. Zero billion.

I assume you're talking about the stimulus package. The money in which that Acorn could have gotten would have required competitive bidding for federal grants and the vast majority of which (out of the hyped "$4 billion!") Acorn stated it had no interest or intention of bidding on since it was stuff far outside their sphere such as public housing renovation.

So the answer is zero. Acorn was set to receive zero billion dollars. I'm sorry Rush and Glen lied to you

Certainly a matter of opinion. I disagree heartily.

Erm... Zero billion is the answer to every disease casualty, Captain Non Sequitur.

Responsibility to a board of directors is generally an incredibly weak responsibility. Not only are they generally full of ex-leadership, but with the way investor markets are built, generic shareholders don't pull much weight.

Also, severance packages are built such that leadership failures that require board of director intervention are financially encouraged, which is frankly retarded at best (Like Alan Fishman, who ran a company into the ground in 17 days and was given 19M. Although to be fair, the economic meltdown probably had more to do with it than his leadership. But 19M for 17 days isn't bad, roughly $140,000/hr of work. If I have a chance when I'm less busy I'm sure I could find many other examples)

In addition, a board of directors and the company as a whole have a mutual self-interest which do not coincide, and are in fact generally opposed, with the interests of those that hire them, especially if those funding it are taxpayers.

Edited, Sep 16th 2009 12:31pm by Timelordwho