Stunned

#26
#26
volinbham said:
You can take this analogy to a larger degree - why would any government stimulus = more demand?

From all I've seen, the biggest thing that would drive more hiring is predictability of future costs.
The logic of stimulus and hiring is the same - more $ in the hands of people = more demand; more demand = more need for jobs. If this logic holds, extending UE payments in effect substitutes for job growth.

IMHO if the govt would not keep extending UE while at the same time showing some signs of a more predictable regulatory environment then the "stimulus" would come from the private sector. Forget the tax incentives and short-term credits. Simplify the tax code and stabilize it. That will do more than a temporary change in rates.
Click to expand...


I am sure future costs is part of the issue.

However, I think there are two other huge components to it.

First, with advances in technology, there is a huge displacement of workers that would not improve no matter how bright the economic future. My firm has let go a third of our clerical staff in the past 6 months -- not because of the future cost of employees, but because since we hired them 10 years ago we've gone as paperless as we can. We are cutting our office space in half come next lease renewal because we don't need the file cabinets, its that simple.

There is nothing government, whether led by Obama or any Republican, can do about that.

Second, the manufacturing base in the U.S. is basically dead. That's been a long time coming and is to a large degree a symptom of our own success. Don't know what can be done to reverse that.
 
#30
#30
Hey LG, let me let you in on a little secret. Corporations hate sitting on money. They want, from the bottom of their greedy little hearts, to use their capital to earn as much extra money as possible. That is what makes the system so wonderful. The good of the companies makes for a stronger company, more jobs, more sales, better economy. For this to work, all we have to rely on is human nature, greed. It is very reliable. High ideals? Not so much.

If the corporations are sitting on their money there is a very good reason for it. They are aware that Bernanke, et al have announced that they want to cause inflation. That means sitting on money is the same as losing money.

Ask yourself, why are they sitting on money?
 
#31
#31
Large Caps not hiring isnt some new phenomena. They have been gradually slowing down hiring this decade to the point where it is nonexistent today. Its a trend that will have to change, and wont happen with this administration in office
 
#33
#33
I'm so stunned that LG once again zeroes in on what he thinks the GOP is doing so horribly wrong and never makes one freakin' comment on all the DNC and Obama in particular have done that is screwing the economy.
 
#34
#34
VolsSportsFan said:
I'm so stunned that LG once again zeroes in on what he thinks the GOP is doing so horribly wrong and never makes one freakin' comment on all the DNC and Obama in particular have done that is screwing the economy.
Click to expand...

Nothing Obama does goes unnoticed already, so what's the point? I'm not defending LG here, but seriously, the stupid **** the GOP does would go unmentioned around here and it would be a bigger circlejerk of stupidity.
 
#35
#35
VOLatile said:
Nothing Obama does goes unnoticed already, so what's the point? I'm not defending LG here, but seriously, the stupid **** the GOP does would go unmentioned around here and it would be a bigger circlejerk of stupidity.
Click to expand...

LG called himself an independent. I've never seen anything he's posted ever give any crediblity to that claim.
 
#37
#37
RespectTradition said:
Hey LG, let me let you in on a little secret. Corporations hate sitting on money. They want, from the bottom of their greedy little hearts, to use their capital to earn as much extra money as possible. That is what makes the system so wonderful. The good of the companies makes for a stronger company, more jobs, more sales, better economy. For this to work, all we have to rely on is human nature, greed. It is very reliable. High ideals? Not so much.

If the corporations are sitting on their money there is a very good reason for it. They are aware that Bernanke, et al have announced that they want to cause inflation. That means sitting on money is the same as losing money.

Ask yourself, why are they sitting on money?
Click to expand...


THAT'S EXACTLY IT !

In a regular and ideal economic model, where the executives of these companies do what is in the combined optimum short and long term interests of these companies, they would spend the money when it made sense to do so in order to maximize future profits.

But we aren't in a regular and ideal economic model. Instead, we are in one in which Wall Street and company execs are in bed with one another, raping these companies and their shareholders for all they can get short term.

That is what is so twisted right now about our economy. The greed of those at the top of these corporations. They personally earn infinitely more if they shore up the cash balance sheet and drive up enormous overnight profits for the members of the boards of directors, who then reward the execs with salaries and bonuses in one year that are more than the entire multi-billion dollar company pays in taxes.

What is needed is a much, much stronger regulatory environment to prevent executives and the boards from hoarding like they are now.
 
#38
#38
BigPapaVol said:
Who is arguing to cut their rates? In fact, mist are arguing to kill the loopholes, fix the number and keep it transparent.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

This? So even BO's buddies like Warren Buffets Company Berkshire Hathaway & GE's Jeffery Immelt pay what they are supposed too.

Can you say Hypocricy?

Update: Warren Buffett’s Company Owes Nearly $1 Billion in Taxes | TheBlaze.com


Guess Which Company Paid $0 in Taxes (on $14.2 Billion in Profits)? Hint: Its CEO Works for Obama | TheBlaze.com

Report: It Looks Like GE Will Pay Taxes for 2010 After All | TheBlaze.com
 
#39
#39
lawgator1 said:
THAT'S EXACTLY IT !

In a regular and ideal economic model, where the executives of these companies do what is in the combined optimum short and long term interests of these companies, they would spend the money when it made sense to do so in order to maximize future profits.

But we aren't in a regular and ideal economic model. Instead, we are in one in which Wall Street and company execs are in bed with one another, raping these companies and their shareholders for all they can get short term.

That is what is so twisted right now about our economy. The greed of those at the top of these corporations. They personally earn infinitely more if they shore up the cash balance sheet and drive up enormous overnight profits for the members of the boards of directors, who then reward the execs with salaries and bonuses in one year that are more than the entire multi-billion dollar company pays in taxes.

What is needed is a much, much stronger regulatory environment to prevent executives and the boards from hoarding like they are now.
Click to expand...

So you want to completely re-write the laws on how a closely held corp can run itself????
 
Last edited:
#40
#40
lawgator1 said:
Instead, we are in one in which Wall Street and company execs are in bed with one another, raping these companies and their shareholders for all they can get short term.

That is what is so twisted right now about our economy. The greed of those at the top of these corporations. They personally earn infinitely more if they shore up the cash balance sheet and drive up enormous overnight profits for the members of the boards of directors, who then reward the execs with salaries and bonuses in one year that are more than the entire multi-billion dollar company pays in taxes.
Click to expand...

Surely you aren't this simplistic.
 
#41
#41
NEOCON said:
So you want to completely re-write the laws on how a closely held corp can run itself????

I hoard every year and then bleed the company right before tax time. deal with it.
Click to expand...


Closely run?

No, I want stronger SEC or banking regulation of how boards of directors and executives compensate one another.

Basically, all I'm asking for is better oversight to make sure that the execs earning $20 million in bonuses are acting in the best fiduciary interests of their employers, rather than in their own selfish interests, in concert with their respective boards of directors.
 
#43
#43
lawgator1 said:
Closely run?

No, I want stronger SEC or banking regulation of how boards of directors and executives compensate one another.

Basically, all I'm asking for is better oversight to make sure that the execs earning $20 million in bonuses are acting in the best fiduciary interests of their employers, rather than in their own selfish interests, in concert with their respective boards of directors.
Click to expand...

Good grief. This is right out of the hardcore left lunatic fringe playbook on economics.
 
#45
#45
lawgator1 said:
Closely run?

No, I want stronger SEC or banking regulation of how boards of directors and executives compensate one another.

Basically, all I'm asking for is better oversight to make sure that the execs earning $20 million in bonuses are acting in the best fiduciary interests of their employers, rather than in their own selfish interests, in concert with their respective boards of directors.
Click to expand...

explain to me why spending money is smart to do right now?
 
#46
#46
lawgator1 said:
Yup. Fiduciary duty is just CraZy talk.
Click to expand...

fiduciary responsibility has been beaten to death by the loony left and we've tried to enact some of the lunacy, but the bottom line is that all of this kind of horsecrap talk is antithetical to a free market economy. Some people are going to make a lot more than others. It's the job of the investors to make sure that rewards are properly aligned with appropriate outcomes. It isn't your responsibility or anyone else's. Your "stacked board" talk is outdated by about 25 years. The institutions now dictate much of the decision making and they aren't making decisions based upon cronyism.
 
#47
#47
lawgator1 said:
No, but in a nutshell I do think that the concept of fiduciary duty is totally foreign to a lot of these folks.
Click to expand...

and that's absurd. All can be sued and would be if they weren't doing their fiduciary duty.

If the big institutional investors in particular companies allow it to be poorly run and allow CEOs to be paid beyond market, it's a lick on them.
 
#48
#48
BigPapaVol said:
fiduciary responsibility has been beaten to death by the loony left and we've tried to enact some of the lunacy, but the bottom line is that all of this kind of horsecrap talk is antithetical to a free market economy. Some people are going to make a lot more than others. It's the job of the investors to make sure that rewards are properly aligned with appropriate outcomes. It isn't your responsibility or anyone else's. Your "stacked board" talk is outdated by about 25 years. The institutions now dictate much of the decision making and they aren't making decisions based upon cronyism.
Click to expand...


Your assumption is that the people at the bottom of that company, or its shareholders, are being given proper, correct, and usable knowledge and information.

I, for one, am not a big fan of hiding behind the mantra of playing in a "free market" when the cards are marked, i.e. the guys you argue have an equal chance are intentionally deceived as to what is happening with the company they own, or work at.

The assumption behind your argument is that the information that everyone acts on is the same, at least in the critical areas, and not manipulated. That's a huge part of fiduciary duty and is a prime area in which they constantly prove that they cannot be trusted and must be policed.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top