U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-30-2018, 05:16 PM
 
5,466 posts, read 2,310,732 times
Reputation: 6745

Advertisements

Hey Rubio! In response to your comment and giving the thought your comment deserves, all I can say is:

DUH
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-30-2018, 05:37 PM
 
2,360 posts, read 1,027,668 times
Reputation: 2071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thatsright19 View Post
And after those people did that, they would understand corporate tax rates are only lower because there’s a dual tax on those earnings. At the corporate AND again at the passthru level.


Getting back to the op...

If I got a $25,000 raise at work, would I be obligated to pay the person cutting my grass more? Did they provide more value? If not, why are they getting a raise? That’s “deep pockets” syndrome if I’ve ever seen it.

Corporations are there to maximize shareholder wealth; not random employees wealth. It’s up to the employee to maximize their earnings by honing their own skills and testing the market for their skill set. The corporation has an obligation to its shareholders, not to pay employees more just because.

If they want to be owners and share in the corporation’s profit, they should buy shares. If the shareholders are losing money....the employees still get paid in bad times. Should employees be demanded to take less than market when the company is sinking? If not, why should they make above market simply because the company is making more money? They aren’t equity partners. They’re stakeholders.

People need to understand the difference between providing value and commanding a salary versus merely demanding it.

Also, companies who had demand for additional capacity would chase it with or without tax reform. They were not sitting on their hands throwing revenue and profit away waiting for tax reform.
That is a self ingrain mind set at any big corporation. If it wasnt for the pure labor that help put them on the map, then they would not be in business. Just because you own stock doesnt give you any more power to the person that is sweeping the floor. If it does, then prove me wrong? If i invest 20 bucks in your company, I am taking a RISK, and a RISK that you will lose or gain, should not have an affect on the person who is answering the phone from getting a raise base on tax cut that was sole purpose was to help business invest in their employees, not some bonus for lobby for a congressman. We the people can provide value all day long, with skills and education, at the end of the day your business is to find the best qualify person at the cheapest rate possible. We the people have to eat and shelter to pay for, so we must in such sad situations have to downgrade Our value to take that underpaid job. I have over 15 Years of Computer knowledge and 5k worth of certs and associate degree in computer science. Was promise that i could be banking over 100k a year by my 5th year in the same industry. Nope, because were a dime a dozen market is saturated with people of my skill sets. Yep your next excuse will be change skill set and find a talent that will put you in demand. Well Yep, I have done that too.. went from a EMT/Medic to Traveling Tech for a fortune 500 to a oil industry company. Still same issues. But back to the story at hand.

Tax cuts are designed to help the econmy and in this case was to help the company offset its wages to be use for the employees. But we knew that was a load of Bull.. and your congressman was bought and pay for. Now are you going to vote them out or keep feeding the cow?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2018, 06:28 PM
 
2,240 posts, read 1,386,969 times
Reputation: 4894
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitpausebutton2 View Post
That is a self ingrain mind set at any big corporation. If it wasnt for the pure labor that help put them on the map, then they would not be in business. Just because you own stock doesnt give you any more power to the person that is sweeping the floor. If it does, then prove me wrong? If i invest 20 bucks in your company, I am taking a RISK, and a RISK that you will lose or gain, should not have an affect on the person who is answering the phone from getting a raise base on tax cut that was sole purpose was to help business invest in their employees, not some bonus for lobby for a congressman. We the people can provide value all day long, with skills and education, at the end of the day your business is to find the best qualify person at the cheapest rate possible. We the people have to eat and shelter to pay for, so we must in such sad situations have to downgrade Our value to take that underpaid job. I have over 15 Years of Computer knowledge and 5k worth of certs and associate degree in computer science. Was promise that i could be banking over 100k a year by my 5th year in the same industry. Nope, because were a dime a dozen market is saturated with people of my skill sets. Yep your next excuse will be change skill set and find a talent that will put you in demand. Well Yep, I have done that too.. went from a EMT/Medic to Traveling Tech for a fortune 500 to a oil industry company. Still same issues. But back to the story at hand.

Tax cuts are designed to help the econmy and in this case was to help the company offset its wages to be use for the employees. But we knew that was a load of Bull.. and your congressman was bought and pay for. Now are you going to vote them out or keep feeding the cow?

Prove that the shareholders hold the power? That’s simple enough. Look for companies who are destroying shareholder value via recurring structural losses. Notice how their cheap equity financing dries up....they go further into debt...and eventually close up shop, get acquired, merge, restructure and/or all of the employees lose their jobs. The shareholders can fire management simply by taking their money somewhere else. The corporations are a fiduciary using other people’s money. They have a mandate to maximize the wealth of those shareholders. Stray from that path, and the market will vote with its feet.

You say you need to eat and have shelter. Ok. Do you pay more for those things than the market dictates out of the good of your heart so THOSE people can eat better and have better shelter? I didn’t think so. We’re all caught on the same treadmill of the market. You have certification that no one apparently wants? Great. Do you pay more for services based on irrelevant certifications? If the person serving you your burger had a PhD, would you expect to pay more for the burger? Nope. They aren’t providing additional value with their credential. What do you expect? Saying you paid $5,000 for certifications is irrelevant. That could be for old ones no one wants or off the wall unknown ones. The only thing that matters is if someone wants it and is willing to pay for it.

You’re also wrong to say that employers are all cheap. That is the business model for some companies sure. Still others will pay a premium for talent. The more economic value these people provide, the higher the packages that they will get. Many many companies pay top dollar for great talent. They are smart enough to maximize their value over the simplistic view of minimizing their cost.

Larger corporate profits flow to the shareholders. The shareholders decide how to spend the money in the economy. Many of those shareholders are the pension, retirement accounts, and investment accounts of ordinary Americans. The board of directors and management has no right to simply pay employees above market and destroy value. The shareholders are perfectly capable of deciding what they will do in the economy with their increased profit.

And of course lost in the rant over the lower corporate tax rate of 21% on domestic income is the section 965 toll charge tax that corporations had to pay on foreign earnings. Tens if not hundreds of billions in a one time tax paid on foreign earnings and profit and cash balances and a total restructuring of the system of worldwide taxation. The transition tax was used as a lever. Every time more individual tax cuts were allowed, or corporate rates declined, the gap was plugged by ratcheting up the corporate toll charge.

And I’m sure your opinion would change if we shifted the discussion away from big evil corporation (Tm) and changed it to an isolated scale where you invest100k of your money into a partnership. What would you think of a management team that bought a boat or gave raises for the amount of your full 100k investment to the hard working employees and returned to you with the message, “they work hard and they need to eat and have shelter”. You might be saying....I need to eat and have shelter....why the hell did you destroy my capital? They had no right to do that and had an obligation to protect and maximize your investment.

Last edited by Thatsright19; 04-30-2018 at 06:56 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2018, 06:36 PM
 
2,360 posts, read 1,027,668 times
Reputation: 2071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thatsright19 View Post
Prove that the shareholders hold the power? That’s simple enough. Look for companies who are destroying shareholder value via recurring structural losses. Notice how their cheap equity financing dries up....they go further into debt...and eventually close up shop, get acquired, merge, restructure and/or all of the employees lose their jobs. The shareholders can fire management simply by taking their money somewhere else. The corporations are a fiduciary using other people’s money.

You say you need to eat and have shelter. Ok. Do you pay more for those things than the market dictates out of the good of your heart so THOSE people can eat better and have better shelter? I didn’t think so. We’re all caught on the same treadmill of the market.

Larger corporate profits flow to the shareholders. The shareholders decide how to spend the money in the economy. Many of those shareholders are the pension, retirement accounts, and investment accounts of ordinary Americans. The board of directors and management has no right to simply pay employees above market and destroy value. The shareholders are perfectly capable of deciding what they will do in the economy with their increased profit.

And of course lost in the rant over the lower corporate tax rate of 21% on domestic income is the section 965 toll charge tax that corporations had to pay on foreign earnings. Tens if not hundreds of billions in a one time tax paid on foreign earnings and profit and cash balances.
Good, keeps them honest, sorry my bad.. had to spit out my vomit when i said that..

But shareholders are in it for themselves only. They would step on their own grandmother to get to that dollar on the floor. So in your words, Share holders are like the headless chicken that dictates on who gets what base on their beliefs? Havent they been proven wrong, and yet we are still feeding the same cow? What makes it so hard for a company to be private own and have a board setup and run like a company should run then leaving it to bunch of rich as holes that wants a bigger boat?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2018, 06:49 PM
 
2,360 posts, read 1,027,668 times
Reputation: 2071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thatsright19 View Post
You say you need to eat and have shelter. Ok. Do you pay more for those things than the market dictates out of the good of your heart so THOSE people can eat better and have better shelter? I didn’t think so. We’re all caught on the same treadmill of the market. You have certifucation that no one apparently wants? Great. Do you pay more for services based on irrelevant certifications? If the person serving you your burger had a PhD, would you expect to pay more for the burger? Nope. They aren’t providing additional value with their credential. What do you expect? Saying you paid $5,000 for certifications is irrelevant. That could be for old ones no one wants or off the wall unknown ones. The only thing that matters is if someone wants it and is willing to pay for it.

You’re also wrong to say that employers are all cheap. That is the business model for some companies sure. Still others will pay a premium for talent. The more economic value these people provide, the higher the packages that they will get. Many many companies pay top dollar for great talent. They are smart enough to maximize their value or the simplistic view of minimizing their cost.

.
didnt quote this in the other post..

I will pay for what the price is and what i think it is worth. If you raise the cost because you want to buy another business then I would pass that up. I am not going help you buy another business to help offset your ROI because you didnt budget right, or scare to eat up some profit earnings. No sympathy from me and my hard earn money, if your reporting that you made 10 billion in profit and want to buy another company for 4 billion, and want me to pay a extra dollar because you lost 4 bill in your profit margin. Hello, mcfly, you use your profits to buy things, not pass it on to the next monkey. Even if you do raise it and have zero excuse for it, it wont trickle down to the employee wages, it will just go to the CEO and exec bonus for trying to pull a fast one on the people.

And yes ALL Employers are cheap. No matter how you put it. They will and try to butter up some talent to make them think they are getting a good deal, but at the end of the road the employee still will lose. May not be cheap on talent, but will be cheap on other things too. Like my place were I am makes billions a year, but buys these cheap as office chairs from walmart. those dinky $30 bucks with just a half cushion seat and plastic arms that breaks. Were still using 17 inch dell monitors made 20 years ago that are slowly going out. Gets replace with another goodwill donation monitor for a while. So yea they are will always be cheap somewhere down the line, wages, materials.. somewhere.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2018, 07:08 PM
 
2,240 posts, read 1,386,969 times
Reputation: 4894
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitpausebutton2 View Post
didnt quote this in the other post..

I will pay for what the price is and what i think it is worth.If you raise the cost because you want to buy another business then I would pass that up. I am not going help you buy another business to help offset your ROI because you didnt budget right, or scare to eat up some profit earnings. No sympathy from me and my hard earn money, if your reporting that you made 10 billion in profit and want to buy another company for 4 billion, and want me to pay a extra dollar because you lost 4 bill in your profit margin. Hello, mcfly, you use your profits to buy things, not pass it on to the next monkey. Even if you do raise it and have zero excuse for it, it wont trickle down to the employee wages, it will just go to the CEO and exec bonus for trying to pull a fast one on the people.

And yes ALL Employers are cheap. No matter how you put it. They will and try to butter up some talent to make them think they are getting a good deal, but at the end of the road the employee still will lose. May not be cheap on talent, but will be cheap on other things too. Like my place were I am makes billions a year, but buys these cheap as office chairs from walmart. those dinky $30 bucks with just a half cushion seat and plastic arms that breaks. Were still using 17 inch dell monitors made 20 years ago that are slowly going out. Gets replace with another goodwill donation monitor for a while. So yea they are will always be cheap somewhere down the line, wages, materials.. somewhere.
And they will do the same.

You’re doing the exact same “greedy” activity the corporation is doing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2018, 08:08 PM
 
3,425 posts, read 3,243,081 times
Reputation: 8045
When a corporation buys back shares, that means it's paying money to others -- private investors, retirement funds, mutual funds, etc. Those others can then take that money and invest it elsewhere in the economy, like in other companies that might be growing faster.

These new investments give other companies more capital to grow, and hire, and invest in new equipment. This has a ripple effect across the economy; equipment manufacturers and vendors benefit from this growth, as do the new employees. As these companies grow, they pay more taxes, so it comes back into government coffers.

The economy is like a garden. Water it, and it grows. Don't, and it dies.

The Democrats, who are inveterately opposed to the Republican president and Congress, are feverishly arguing that the tax cut only benefits the rich, totally glossing over the vast economic growth that it has caused and continues to cause. They also hope you are ignoring the huge uptick in hiring.

Unemployment among Blacks and Hispanics isn't just going down; it's the lowest ever recorded. Unemployment across the board is now so low that it's turning into a problem. Not enough people applying to work at plants and factories and stores around the country. And this is forcing employers to raise wages.

You don't need to force a $15/hour minimum wage on all businesses when there's a labor shortage. Just cut taxes and regulations, which encourages business growth, and the supply-and-demand situation will take care of things.

Some people think we are due for a recession soon, because it's been technically a bull market for seven years and it's getting to be time for a correction. But if it's true, it's sure not obvious. Fundamentals are sound, housing is booming again but without a debt bubble looming, the U.S. is turning into an energy exporter, revival of domestic chemicals, plastics and steel production, booming domestic SUV and truck demand, etc. The tax cut combined with regulatory reform has been a boon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2018, 09:00 PM
 
2,360 posts, read 1,027,668 times
Reputation: 2071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thatsright19 View Post
And they will do the same.

You’re doing the exact same “greedy” activity the corporation is doing.
No im not, i am being cautious with my money. Am i getting a better deal vs other products of the same?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2018, 09:04 PM
 
2,360 posts, read 1,027,668 times
Reputation: 2071
Quote:
Originally Posted by blisterpeanuts View Post
When a corporation buys back shares, that means it's paying money to others -- private investors, retirement funds, mutual funds, etc. Those others can then take that money and invest it elsewhere in the economy, like in other companies that might be growing faster.

These new investments give other companies more capital to grow, and hire, and invest in new equipment. This has a ripple effect across the economy; equipment manufacturers and vendors benefit from this growth, as do the new employees. As these companies grow, they pay more taxes, so it comes back into government coffers.


The economy is like a garden. Water it, and it grows. Don't, and it dies.

That is the theory, but it has not happen and will not happen. If that was the case, we should be seeing job openings and dedicate people would see a bump in their pay checks or promotions. We are not seeing that now, nor in our future. Our company got a tax break, and was told it will be use for in-house maintenance needs such as office equipment, hire more house keepers and back fill some job openings. Nope, it ended up to give a CEO a pay raise, move some executives around and put them in fake titles to paddend their resume, and we got a room size of a bathroom with a massage chair that costs a dollar per min.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2018, 09:41 PM
 
6,166 posts, read 3,251,225 times
Reputation: 12502
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitpausebutton2 View Post
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sen-r...?.tsrc=fauxdal

""There is still a lot of thinking on the right that if big corporations are happy, they're going to take the money they're saving and reinvest it in American workers," Rubio, R-Fla., told The Economist in a story release Monday. "In fact they bought back shares, a few gave out bonuses; there's no evidence whatsoever that the money's been massively poured back into the American worker."


Have to agree with that statement.
They knew the businesses wouldn't. There was a video showing politicians asking room of business people how many planned on using the tax cut windfall to invest in new employees, their businesses, and such. Only about 2 raised their hands. So yeah, the politicians knew. But we all knew. Trickle down economics doesn't exist. It's a rightwing meme that has no basis in fact.

We all know that the middle class is the engine of our economy. When the middle class (and working class) has more expendable income, they SPEND it. New appliances, new car, new home projects. It spurs the economy. More spending = growing business for local businesses, which in turn generates new jobs and generates more profit for the businesses. Businesses grow by getting more business.

Any business owner will tell you that a tax cut for him won't mean he hires new workers. He hires new workers when the workers he has can't handle the business load. The amount of business he gets, and the number of workers he has, is unrelated to any tax cut he might get.

And we will end up with over $1 Trillion Dollars of debt to pay for those tax cuts to the corporations and wealthy.

We just went thru this with the Bush tax cuts. It gave us this huge deficit we have...we are paying, right now, for the Bush tax cuts. Before we finish paying for that, we now have this massive new debt to add to it.

We also have deregulation.

This is exactly what just happened. That resulted in the Great Recession. So we can expect a recession in the next few years, when the deregulation + massive debt come home to roost.

Last edited by bpollen; 04-30-2018 at 10:35 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top