Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Forbes)   Only 50 US companies are hoarding close to 6% of the GDP which amounts to $889B   (forbes.com) divider line 51
    More: Scary, gross domestic product, U.S., share buyback, cost accounts, Benjamins, capital expenditures  
•       •       •

2042 clicks; posted to Business » on 20 Mar 2013 at 11:20 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



51 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-20 11:21:30 AM  
Damn kulaks.
 
2013-03-20 11:25:20 AM  
Only 6% of our GDP? Sounds like someone needs a tax break.
 
2013-03-20 11:27:26 AM  
So investors are just like "Totes cool.  It's not like I want dividends or for you to spend the money on R&D and acquisitions to boost shareholder value."?
 
2013-03-20 11:29:37 AM  
"At the same time, if the economy begins to pick up, hiring should gather steam, possibly forcing firms to tap their stash. "


 yeahh,,, ok..
 
2013-03-20 11:43:16 AM  
Maybe they could create some jobs?  Naaah...that would be crazy!
 
2013-03-20 11:49:33 AM  
Job creation does not come from supply.  It comes from demand.

The Fed is trying to create demand by keeping interest rates low to drive the wealth effect, but it's only working in fits and starts.  It doesn't help that the ECB is not attempting to do this.
 
2013-03-20 11:53:10 AM  
wetoldthemitwouldtrickledown.jpg
 
2013-03-20 11:56:22 AM  
Good. They can pay for the Iraq War then. I'm farking skint.
 
2013-03-20 11:57:50 AM  

Rapmaster2000: Job creation does not come from supply.  It comes from demand.

The Fed is trying to create demand by keeping interest rates low to drive the wealth effect, but it's only working in fits and starts.  It doesn't help that the ECB is not attempting to do this.


this
And these companies already have shiatloads of cash so the really don't care one way or the other if their next iButtplug sells or not.
 
2013-03-20 11:58:30 AM  

Rapmaster2000: Job creation does not come from supply.  It comes from demand.


You talk like one of them Kenyanesians.
 
2013-03-20 12:08:32 PM  
Hoarding, also known as saving. What a horrible idea

Rapmaster2000: Job creation does not come from supply.  It comes from demand.


Was there a demand for smart phones before they were for sale or did a company or companies providing the devices at an acceptable price create that demand?
 
2013-03-20 12:11:18 PM  

MugzyBrown: Was there a demand for smart phones before they were for sale or did a company or companies providing the devices at an acceptable price create that demand?


There was an abstract demand for better mobile connectivity, much like before people knew what an automobile was there was an abstract demand for individual transportation you didn't have to feed hay.
 
2013-03-20 12:12:15 PM  

MugzyBrown: Hoarding, also known as saving. What a horrible idea

Rapmaster2000: Job creation does not come from supply.  It comes from demand.

Was there a demand for smart phones before they were for sale or did a company or companies providing the devices at an acceptable price create that demand?


Who invests in developing a product for which there is no market? Demand can be inchoate.
 
2013-03-20 12:12:19 PM  
The answer to most of our issues is to raise taxes.  Give big tax breaks for constructive use of assets, stop rewarding companies for sitting on piles of cash.  Right now there is little incentive to put money to work.  But the GOP refuses to hear that any tax increase can be a positive for the economy.
 
2013-03-20 12:17:36 PM  

Jaws_Victim: Only 6% of our GDP? Sounds like someone needs a tax break.


Sounds like they have already found one.
 
2013-03-20 12:20:51 PM  
Why compare to GDP... that does not make sense.   Compare it to M2.
 
2013-03-20 12:22:27 PM  

Rapmaster2000: Job creation does not come from supply. It comes from demand.


I love how supply/demand has become the latest defacto Fark go-to answer for everything under the sun.

Housing bubble in the UK cou- SUPLY AND DMEAND

lululemon will lose money on th- SUPPLY ND DEMAND

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just an observational type of guy I suppose, it's humourous to me. You could say the demand for a new go-to-answer around here is high, so people are supplying one.

/it works for anything!
 
2013-03-20 12:24:58 PM  

sure haven't: Rapmaster2000: Job creation does not come from supply. It comes from demand.

I love how supply/demand has become the latest defacto Fark go-to answer for everything under the sun.


I haven't really noticed that, but we are in the business tab.  People are generally going to cite supply and demand fairly frequently regarding economic issues.
 
2013-03-20 12:33:35 PM  

Rapmaster2000: sure haven't: Rapmaster2000: Job creation does not come from supply. It comes from demand.

I love how supply/demand has become the latest defacto Fark go-to answer for everything under the sun.

I haven't really noticed that, but we are in the business tab.  People are generally going to cite supply and demand fairly frequently regarding economic issues.


I suppose so, I've been cruising Fark for like a decade and it's just been the last week or so that I've really seen it pop up everywhere. There are trends with everything.

/again, no shot at you meant whatsoever
 
2013-03-20 12:38:23 PM  

sure haven't: Rapmaster2000: sure haven't: Rapmaster2000: Job creation does not come from supply. It comes from demand.

I love how supply/demand has become the latest defacto Fark go-to answer for everything under the sun.

I haven't really noticed that, but we are in the business tab.  People are generally going to cite supply and demand fairly frequently regarding economic issues.

I suppose so, I've been cruising Fark for like a decade and it's just been the last week or so that I've really seen it pop up everywhere. There are trends with everything.

/again, no shot at you meant whatsoever


No prob.  I know what you mean.  I find the "you know how I know" thing annoying and I've never gotten into FAIL or butthurt.

And people, please stop beginning sentences with "methinks" and ending dickish rants with "cheers".  You sound like you're trying too hard.
 
2013-03-20 12:43:26 PM  
At the same time, if the economy begins to pick up, hiring should gather steam, possibly forcing firms to tap their stash.

This is right up there with "employers can't find workers with skills"... tired of the farking media parroting this claptrap.

Companies will buy back stock or funnel the money elsewhere.
 
2013-03-20 01:35:34 PM  
If we stop allowing corporations to dodge their taxes by pretending all their profits happen in nations that have little to no corporate tax, this problem goes away.

For example:

Forest Laboratories Inc., the manufacturer of the antidepressant Lexapro, cut its total income tax bill by more than a third last year by allocating income through various subsidiaries.

"They're a company that does almost 100 percent of its sales here in the U.S., they have almost 100 percent of their employees in the U.S., they're headquartered in New York City and yet the majority of their profits show up overseas, most of them attributed to a mailbox in Bermuda," Drucker says.


Bermuda, of course, having no Corporate tax.

What these companies are waiting for is another "one time" tax holiday, like the one they got last time. They (and their sold out friends in Congress) keep on pushing for it.

Some of the nation's largest corporations have amassed vast profits outside the country and are pressing Congress and the Obama administration for a tax break to bring the money home.

Under the proposal, known as a repatriation holiday, the federal income tax owed on such profits returned to the United States would fall to 5.25 percent for one year, from 35 percent. In the short term, the measure could generate tens of billions in tax revenues as companies transfer money that would otherwise remain abroad, and it could help ease the huge budget deficit.

Corporations and their lobbyists say the tax break could resuscitate the gasping recovery by inducing multinational corporations to inject $1 trillion or more into the economy, and they promoted the proposal as "the next stimulus" at a conference last Wednesday in Washington.

But that's not how it worked last time. Congress and the Bush administration offered companies a similar tax incentive, in 2005, in hopes of spurring domestic hiring and investment, and 800 took advantage.

Though the tax break lured them into bringing $312 billion back to the United States, 92 percent of that money was returned to shareholders in the form of dividends and stock buybacks, according to a study by the nonpartisan National Bureau of Economic Research.

Indeed, 60 percent of the benefits went to just 15 of the largest United States multinational companies - many of which laid off domestic workers, closed plants and shifted even more of their profits and resources abroad in hopes of cashing in on the next repatriation holiday.


Despite the fact that the last time they promised job growth yet followed up their "one time" tax holiday with American job cuts and continued plant closures, the Corporations and their allies in Congress continue to push for another.
 
2013-03-20 01:59:04 PM  
Billion? With a B?

content.internetvideoarchive.com

"With a B, yes"
 
2013-03-20 02:01:45 PM  

BullBearMS: If we stop allowing corporations to dodge their taxes by pretending all their profits happen in nations that have little to no corporate tax, this problem goes away.


Yeah! Tell the to get farked and that they are going to have every last penny taxed right the fark out of them! They will be more than happy just to lay back and enjoy it! Problem solved!
 
2013-03-20 02:39:19 PM  
Is this the thread where we hate successful companies?
 
2013-03-20 02:44:31 PM  

cretinbob: Rapmaster2000: Job creation does not come from supply.  It comes from demand.

The Fed is trying to create demand by keeping interest rates low to drive the wealth effect, but it's only working in fits and starts.  It doesn't help that the ECB is not attempting to do this.

this
And these companies already have shiatloads of cash so the really don't care one way or the other if their next iButtplug sells or not.


Go ahead and introduce your face to your palm for that one.  Go on, it's ok.
 
2013-03-20 03:32:53 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: BullBearMS: If we stop allowing corporations to dodge their taxes by pretending all their profits happen in nations that have little to no corporate tax, this problem goes away.

Yeah! Tell the to get farked and that they are going to have every last penny taxed right the fark out of them! They will be more than happy just to lay back and enjoy it! Problem solved!


Nah, instead we should allow them to rob US taxpayers by reaping all of the benefits of acting in a stable society but paying for none of it! Clearly, on that path, lies prosperity.
 
2013-03-20 03:49:41 PM  

Felgraf: Nah, instead we should allow them to rob US taxpayers by reaping all of the benefits of acting in a stable society but paying for none of it!


You realize that US taxpayers foot the bill in the end anyway, don't you?
 
2013-03-20 03:53:21 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Felgraf: Nah, instead we should allow them to rob US taxpayers by reaping all of the benefits of acting in a stable society but paying for none of it!

You realize that US taxpayers foot the bill in the end anyway, don't you?


Not on everything, because, especially for non-essential goods, there is a thing called a supply/demand curve...
 
2013-03-20 04:08:50 PM  
If these companies repatriated cash, they still would have no more incentive to hire people.  But they would have incentive to invest their cash in other U. S. firms that need to hire.  It's not just demand for your product that can boost employment and demand for your product.

Foreign countries, of course, want all that cash to employ their citizens. It's a competitive tug of war.
 
2013-03-20 04:13:49 PM  

tricycleracer: MugzyBrown: Was there a demand for smart phones before they were for sale or did a company or companies providing the devices at an acceptable price create that demand?

There was an abstract demand for better mobile connectivity, much like before people knew what an automobile was there was an abstract demand for individual transportation you didn't have to feed hay.


The exchange of something for something also means that consumption doesn't precede production, i.e. we first have to produce a useful product before it can be exchanged for money and only then we could exchange money for goods we desire. Consumption is fully funded by preceding production.
 
2013-03-20 04:16:34 PM  

tricycleracer: So investors are just like "Totes cool.  It's not like I want dividends or for you to spend the money on R&D and acquisitions to boost shareholder value."?


acquisitions generally harm shareholder value. having excessive cash on one's balance sheet is an invitation to destroy wealth, not create more.

some companies do it right, like IBM. But more often than not, they overpay and/or fark up the integration (Cisco, HP, Bank of America, Citi, AOL, etc)
 
2013-03-20 04:48:53 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: BullBearMS: If we stop allowing corporations to dodge their taxes by pretending all their profits happen in nations that have little to no corporate tax, this problem goes away.

Yeah! Tell the to get farked and that they are going to have every last penny taxed right the fark out of them! They will be more than happy just to lay back and enjoy it! Problem solved!


The rich have been allowed to buy off Congress and get a tax rate of only 15% for their major source of income, Capital Gains. This is much much lower than the rate paid by the working poor.

Then they are allowed to dodge paying taxes on their Corporations by pretending the profits from activity inside the United States really occurs in a post office box in Bermuda where corporate taxes are non-existent.

Meanwhile, even the ranking Democrats like Pelosi and Obama are pushing for cuts to the social safety net programs.

Frankly, it's angry mob time.
 
2013-03-20 04:50:05 PM  

MugzyBrown: tricycleracer: MugzyBrown: Was there a demand for smart phones before they were for sale or did a company or companies providing the devices at an acceptable price create that demand?

There was an abstract demand for better mobile connectivity, much like before people knew what an automobile was there was an abstract demand for individual transportation you didn't have to feed hay.

The exchange of something for something also means that consumption doesn't precede production, i.e. we first have to produce a useful product before it can be exchanged for money and only then we could exchange money for goods we desire. Consumption is fully funded by preceding production.


Dare I jump in and say they fuel each other in equilibrium.
 
2013-03-20 05:28:05 PM  

BullBearMS: The rich have been allowed to buy off Congress and get a tax rate of only 15% for their major source of income, Capital Gains. This is much much lower than the rate paid by the working poor.

Then they are allowed to dodge paying taxes on their Corporations by pretending the profits from activity inside the United States really occurs in a post office box in Bermuda where corporate taxes are non-existent.


There's a better waaaaaaay. And it puts a bullet into K Street as well.
 
2013-03-20 06:42:50 PM  

LL316: Is this the thread where we hate successful companies?


Yes.  They should be run more like governments where they spend 100% or more of what they take in.  That way when there are a few or ten negative quarters they have to fire everyone rather than have the ability to innovate new product lines.  Operating in accordance with Keynesian economics, minus the saving during good times part, is the smart, moral, and all around just way to run a business.
 
2013-03-20 07:27:55 PM  

LL316: Is this the thread where we hate successful companies?


In the 50s and 60s corporate profits were equal to between 6 and 7 percent of the GDP. Now it's 11 percent. Back then incomes were growing across the board. Today they aren't. It would seem there would be some justification to taking umbrage with how companies today are operating.
 
2013-03-20 08:22:57 PM  

Big_Fat_Liar: LL316: Is this the thread where we hate successful companies?

Yes.  They should be run more like governments where they spend 100% or more of what they take in.  That way when there are a few or ten negative quarters they have to fire everyone rather than have the ability to innovate new product lines.  Operating in accordance with Keynesian economics, minus the saving during good times part, is the smart, moral, and all around just way to run a business.


Corporate Tip:  Corporations would prefer not to be sitting on too much cash.  They would rather be investing that cash in something that produces a larger return than inflation.  The executives want it and the shareholders demand it.

That's why this is expected to be a banner year in M&A as companies both use their cash piles and low borrowing costs to find higher growth opportunities.  There were a few good size ones today in REITs and corporate lending.
 
2013-03-20 09:50:11 PM  
GDP is a flow, savings are a stock. Your comparison is invalid.

Try comparing profits, income, to GDP, or comparing corporate savings to total private savings. Or I guess keep being the same terrible economists Forbes always hires to write their pieces.
 
2013-03-20 10:05:44 PM  

LL316: Is this the thread where we hate successful companies?


It's Fark, dude.  You bet your ass it is!
 
2013-03-20 10:08:06 PM  

Thats_right_ALL_the_tea: GDP is a flow, savings are a stock. Your comparison is invalid.

Try comparing profits, income, to GDP, or comparing corporate savings to total private savings. Or I guess keep being the same terrible economists Forbes always hires to write their pieces.


I think the point is that if these corporations did something with that cash instead of sitting on it, it would increase GDP by more than 6% due to be velocity of money.
 
2013-03-21 12:02:22 AM  

max_pooper: Thats_right_ALL_the_tea: GDP is a flow, savings are a stock. Your comparison is invalid.

Try comparing profits, income, to GDP, or comparing corporate savings to total private savings. Or I guess keep being the same terrible economists Forbes always hires to write their pieces.

I think the point is that if these corporations did something with that cash instead of sitting on it, it would increase GDP by more than 6% due to be velocity of money.


Yeah, it's the current lack of velocity of money that has the Fed tearing their hair out.  They can only dump money into the system, but the rules are set up to funnel it all quickly to the top, and only Congress can change those rules.
 
2013-03-21 12:27:10 AM  

Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: max_pooper: Thats_right_ALL_the_tea: GDP is a flow, savings are a stock. Your comparison is invalid.

Try comparing profits, income, to GDP, or comparing corporate savings to total private savings. Or I guess keep being the same terrible economists Forbes always hires to write their pieces.

I think the point is that if these corporations did something with that cash instead of sitting on it, it would increase GDP by more than 6% due to be velocity of money.

Yeah, it's the current lack of velocity of money that has the Fed tearing their hair out.  They can only dump money into the system, but the rules are set up to funnel it all quickly to the top, and only Congress can change those rules.


So, we've had QE since 2008, when will this money hit the market and cause the inflation that people are so scared about?  I've been hearing that inflation is imminent, but have yet to see <b>rampant</b> inflation.  Just curious if you've any thoughts as to why there is a discontinuity between supposed QE inflation and lack of actual inflation.  Not attacking, just gathering other opinions.
 
2013-03-21 01:39:50 AM  

Brontes: Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: max_pooper: Thats_right_ALL_the_tea: GDP is a flow, savings are a stock. Your comparison is invalid.

Try comparing profits, income, to GDP, or comparing corporate savings to total private savings. Or I guess keep being the same terrible economists Forbes always hires to write their pieces.

I think the point is that if these corporations did something with that cash instead of sitting on it, it would increase GDP by more than 6% due to be velocity of money.

Yeah, it's the current lack of velocity of money that has the Fed tearing their hair out.  They can only dump money into the system, but the rules are set up to funnel it all quickly to the top, and only Congress can change those rules.

So, we've had QE since 2008, when will this money hit the market and cause the inflation that people are so scared about?  I've been hearing that inflation is imminent, but have yet to see <b>rampant</b> inflation.  Just curious if you've any thoughts as to why there is a discontinuity between supposed QE inflation and lack of actual inflation.  Not attacking, just gathering other opinions.


Here's a good article on why inflation is probably not going to be an issue for the next 10-15 years:

Deflation
 
2013-03-21 09:40:11 AM  

Felgraf: Dancin_In_Anson: Felgraf: Nah, instead we should allow them to rob US taxpayers by reaping all of the benefits of acting in a stable society but paying for none of it!

You realize that US taxpayers foot the bill in the end anyway, don't you?

Not on everything, because, especially for non-essential goods, there is a thing called a supply/demand curve...


Also some taxpayers are more equal than others, so shifting around where taxes are incident can affect which taxpayers end up paying for them.
 
2013-03-21 12:36:20 PM  

Brontes: but have yet to see <b>rampant</b> inflation


You haven't been to the grocery store?

People with low/fixed incomes are having a tough time, sport.
 
2013-03-21 04:07:54 PM  

highendmighty: wetoldthemitwouldtrickledown.jpg


Odd that as soon as the trickle down policies stopped, so did the economy. Thanks Obama.
 
2013-03-21 04:09:07 PM  

MugzyBrown: Hoarding, also known as saving. What a horrible idea

Rapmaster2000: Job creation does not come from supply.  It comes from demand.

Was there a demand for smart phones before they were for sale or did a company or companies providing the devices at an acceptable price create that demand?


Smartphones are jobs?
 
2013-03-21 04:10:30 PM  

Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: The answer to most of our issues is to raise taxes.  Give big tax breaks for constructive use of assets, stop rewarding companies for sitting on piles of cash.  Right now there is little incentive to put money to work.  But the GOP refuses to hear that any tax increase can be a positive for the economy.


Article: The USA's ridiculously overbearing tax rates keeps money overseas.

Your solution is to raise taxes higher? Good luck. /morgan freeman voice
 
2013-03-21 04:14:29 PM  

BullBearMS: If we stop allowing corporations to dodge their taxes by pretending all their profits happen in nations that have little to no corporate tax, this problem goes away.


Always funny how liberals whine about the USA extending their authority to foreign countries, then pretend like they have any right to tax money made overseas.
 
Displayed 50 of 51 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report