Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Stock buybacks are a little more complicated than “giving money to the rich”

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Stock buybacks are a little more complicated than “giving money to the rich”

Sure. So are all those fancy derivatives that caused the collapse of '08. Lots of fancy things in Finance that benefit the few.

[5mn_Major]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Although a stock buy back can help a given company modestly...the primary motivation for stock buy backs is to significantly increase the value of top executives holdings in the company (read: money for the board). Not sure if that's a good pay off for an additional $1 trillion in debt.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Sure. So are all those fancy derivatives that caused the collapse of '08. Lots of fancy things in Finance that benefit the few.

Non-sequitur alert.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Although a stock buy back can help a given company modestly...the primary motivation for stock buy backs is to significantly increase the value of top executives holdings in the company (read: money for the board). Not sure if that's a good pay off for an additional $1 trillion in debt.

^^^^^^^^^

[jerphisch]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

The buy back number is a little deceptive though. Many of the buybacks would have happened whether or not the tax cut did. Yes, they are a record level and some of that is due to the tax cut, but I have seen nothing that tries to quantify it. It may well be more like $6B in bonuses and $20B in buy backs, which is more than a little different from $170B. In no way do I think the tax cut was a good idea, but throwing around big scary numbers that have no thought behind them isn't a good way to make the case.

[unofan]

The buy back number is a little deceptive though. Many of the buybacks would have happened whether or not the tax cut did. Yes, they are a record level and some of that is due to the tax cut, but I have seen nothing that tries to quantify it. It may well be more like $6B in bonuses and $20B in buy backs, which is more than a little different from $170B. In no way do I think the tax cut was a good idea, but throwing around big scary numbers that have no thought behind them isn't a good way to make the case.

Many of the bonuses would've, too.

Nevertheless, the evidence available shows more of it is going to buybacks than employee pay.

[French Rage]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

World reactions to TT (the Trump tariff) ranked by the importance of the partner:

#1 European Union: "We will not sit idly while our industry is hit with unfair measures that put thousands of European jobs at risk, The EU will react firmly and commensurately to defend our interests."
#2 China "urges the United States to show restraint in using protective trade measures, respect multilateral trade rules, and make a positive contribution to international trade order,"
#3 Canada: "Canada will take responsive measures to defend its trade interests and workers, its absolutely unacceptable."
#4 Mexico "made it clear that if included [in tariffs], Mexico will have no other option than to react."
#5 Japan Japan: "I don't think exports of steel and aluminum from Japan, which is a U.S. ally, damages U.S. national security in any way, and we would like to explain that to the U.S."
#6 Germany called on the EU to respond "with determination, its not at all acceptable,"
#10 Australia "The imposition of a tariff like this will do nothing other than distort trade and ultimately, we believe, will lead to a loss of jobs,"

This says nothing about the costs to producing businesses and consumers of increasing across the board prices of products using said materials.

Simply catastrophic policy.

I have it in good authority that trade wars are good and easy to win.

[Kepler]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

I have it in good authority that trade wars are good and easy to win.

Remember our economic boom after Smoot–Hawley?

[joecct]

I have it in good authority that trade wars are good and easy to win.

Here's another one(won)

@CTVMercedes: India jacks up the import tariff on chickpeas by 20% in the wake of Canada-India diplomatic spat. Saskatchewan farmers won't be happy. https://www.producer.com/2018/03/ind...ickpea-duty-2/ #cdnpoli

[Kepler]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Here's another one(won)

@CTVMercedes: India jacks up the import tariff on chickpeas by 20% in the wake of Canada-India diplomatic spat. Saskatchewan farmers won't be happy. https://www.producer.com/2018/03/ind...ickpea-duty-2/ #cdnpoli

Who had Alberta v India in their RISK pool?

[jerphisch]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Many of the bonuses would've, too.

Nevertheless, the evidence available shows more of it is going to buybacks than employee pay.

I disagree on the bonuses, these have been one time across the board bonuses that you typically don't see. And I would challenge you on presenting actual evidence that shows the money has gone to buybacks that goes beyond "it's big this year". The graph of buy backs by year is a mountain range that peaked in 2016, was down in 2017, and is peaking again. You want to talk evidence, give some that says that isn't just part of the natural year over year variance but is due to the tax cuts. Again, I'm not arguing that workers are getting anything other than a pathetically small amount of the tax cuts thrown their way, I'm arguing that this is an incredibly stupid and completely inaccurate way of showing it.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

I disagree on the bonuses, these have been one time across the board bonuses that you typically don't see. And I would challenge you on presenting actual evidence that shows the money has gone to buybacks that goes beyond "it's big this year". The graph of buy backs by year is a mountain range that peaked in 2016, was down in 2017, and is peaking again. You want to talk evidence, give some that says that isn't just part of the natural year over year variance but is due to the tax cuts. Again, I'm not arguing that workers are getting anything other than a pathetically small amount of the tax cuts thrown their way, I'm arguing that this is an incredibly stupid and completely inaccurate way of showing it.

You missed all the interviews with all the CEO's etc. that said that was EXACTLY what they were going to do with the money before the tax cut even passed? Or what?

[jerphisch]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

You missed all the interviews with all the CEO's etc. that said that was EXACTLY what they were going to do with the money before the tax cut even passed? Or what?

Ok, so how much would have happened without the tax cuts? How much of the $170B are you attributing to them? In 2016 it was $147B, so it's not like we're off the charts into crazy land. Give a number and back it up.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Ok, so how much would have happened without the tax cuts? How much of the $170B are you attributing to them? In 2016 it was $147B, so it's not like we're off the charts into crazy land. Give a number and back it up.

Or, how about we acknowledge that when corporations get tax cuts, or any money for that matter, they're not going to use it for workers. Which is the whole ****ing point anyway.

In other words. Republicans lied. Again.