Obama breaking his old records, what a guy

PostmodernProphet said:
because only Harry is making the decision that its tainted.......and likely, he's only applying that label to bills he's afraid would actually get enough bipartisan support to pass.......wait, is that what you meant by "tainted".....that it might have bipartisan support?...........
Click to expand...
I've already explained what I meant by 'tainted'.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/house-republicans-to-attach-keystone-language-to-payroll-bill-20111208

[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Rx6ZeMMv2o"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Rx6ZeMMv2o

[URL="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/01/29/boehner_house_likely_to_attack_keystone_approval_to_jobs_bil.html"]http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/01/29/boehner_house_likely_to_attack_keystone_approval_to_jobs_bil.html


[URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/22/anti-abortion-amendments-senate_n_2934233.html"]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/22/anti-abortion-amendments-senate_n_2934233.html




Th[/URL]e[/URL]r[/URL]e are plenty of others
 
tekkychick said:
tell me about that! I worked at a company awhile back that had a reduction in force of about 12% and the only reason for it was to boost the stock price (due to other things going on they wanted it higher). We lost some very good people.
Click to expand...
Yep. And investors are liable for 15% cap gains taxation or less when they cash in.

So let's just wait for someone to illustrate the low taxes/higher employment rate argument again.

Or the record Wall St. numbers/low employment numbers conundrum.
 
Althea said:
Business capital would be helpful for startups, or for expansion of an established business.

Not as helpful as demand, which is not created by capital investment. You still cannot draw the line between record Wall St. numbers, and a corresponding jobs report.

When you put capital into a business, you expect a return. Nothing matters but share price. Not jobs, not employees.....PROFITS.

The quickest way to increase share price, is to lay off a few thousand workers.
Click to expand...

Stock price is a measure of the growth potential of a company, and a company with growth potential uses that capital to, well, grow.

Layoffs result in higher efficiency, and more profits. It's called 'cutting out the dead wood to make the tree thrive'. The company then has growth potential with a more efficient work force. The alternative id for the company to languish, decline, and possibly go bankrupt. Is this what you prefer?

Most of the recent "growth" in stock prices is due to the devaluation of the dollar.
 
DamnYankee said:
No, I'm right.
Click to expand...

I was heading out the door, so wasn't able to do a more verbose answer, but since I had just posted about a company that cut employees strictly to raise stock price, I thought that pretty well proved my point.

Yes, some companies do layoffs because they are inefficient and need to reduce headcount

Some companies, however, do layoffs to raise their stock price.

Also reminds me of Circuit City - remember them? They laid off their experienced sales people (who were partly on commission) because they made too much money. Really? laying off successful sales people? Predictable results - company went into even more of a nose dive and closed.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/17837882/ns/business-us_business/t/circuit-city-fire-more-workers/#.Ube5po1lRMQ

stupid. But businesses do stupid things.
 
tekkychick said:
I was heading out the door, so wasn't able to do a more verbose answer, but since I had just posted about a company that cut employees strictly to raise stock price, I thought that pretty well proved my point.

Yes, some companies do layoffs because they are inefficient and need to reduce headcount

Some companies, however, do layoffs to raise their stock price.

Also reminds me of Circuit City - remember them? They laid off their experienced sales people (who were partly on commission) because they made too much money. Really? laying off successful sales people? Predictable results - company went into even more of a nose dive and closed.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/17837882/ns/business-us_business/t/circuit-city-fire-more-workers/#.Ube5po1lRMQ

stupid. But businesses do stupid things.
Click to expand...

Stupid CEOs run their companies into the ground. What's your point?
 
DamnYankee said:
Stock price is a measure of the growth potential of a company, and a company with growth potential uses that capital to, well, grow.

.
Click to expand...
Sometimes. But, in an economy where nobody has the money to buy the product, share price is easily manipulated by power players. There is no growth, no hiring. Just profits when said players inflate the price, and then sell at a gain.
 
Althea said:
Sometimes. But, in an economy where nobody has the money to buy the product, share price is easily manipulated by power players. There is no growth, no hiring. Just profits when said players inflate the price, and then sell at a gain.
Click to expand...
You mean like George Soros?
 
DamnYankee said:
You mean like George Soros?
Click to expand...
I mean like anyone who has the money to move the market. Typically, hedge fund managers, and the like.

So tell me again about the correlation between record Wall St numbers, and record food stamp numbers.
 
Althea said:
I mean like anyone who has the money to move the market. Typically, hedge fund managers, and the like.

So tell me again about the correlation between record Wall St numbers, and record food stamp numbers.
Click to expand...
Personally I think guys like George Soros who manipulate markets should be put into prison, so no argument from me there. But that's not what small investors like Topper have any ability to do.

Ethanol requirements in motor fuel have increased the demand for corn, hence food prices have risen dramatically. Farmers are making large profits and expanding, and this has resulted in demand for machinery and everything related. The economy overall, sucks, and we have a large percentage of Americans not able to participate in the labor pool. Lack of good jobs + high food prices = high food stamp utilization.
 
DamnYankee said:
Personally I think guys like George Soros who manipulate markets should be put into prison, so no argument from me there. But that's not what small investors like Topper have any ability to do.

Ethanol requirements in motor fuel have increased the demand for corn, hence food prices have risen dramatically. Farmers are making large profits and expanding, and this has resulted in demand for machinery and everything related. The economy overall, sucks, and we have a large percentage of Americans not able to participate in the labor pool. Lack of good jobs + high food prices = high food stamp utilization.
Click to expand...
I don't think the farmers are making as much money as those who invest in corn futures...namely, our legislators.

Food prices are affected by the corn lobby, without a doubt. But the issue is jobs. The issue on the table, is the lack of jobs numbers, given low taxation, and record profits for investors.

I think we can safely put to bed the 'low taxes create jobs' mantra.

Demand creates jobs...plain and simple. If they won't come from the private sector, then by all means...we'll have to create them in the public sector.
 
Althea said:
I don't think the farmers are making as much money as those who invest in corn futures...namely, our legislators.

Food prices are affected by the corn lobby, without a doubt. But the issue is jobs. The issue on the table, is the lack of jobs numbers, given low taxation, and record profits for investors.

I think we can safely put to bed the 'low taxes create jobs' mantra.

Demand creates jobs...plain and simple. If they won't come from the private sector, then by all means...we'll have to create them in the public sector.
Click to expand...

The issue isn't jobs, but overall productivity. Less productivity means less of everything, on average, for everyone. "Creating" government jobs can only reduce productivity. The fact that GovCo has gotten so excessively large is why the economy sucks so badly.
 
Althea said:
I think we can safely put to bed the 'low taxes create jobs' mantra.

Demand creates jobs...plain and simple. If they won't come from the private sector, then by all means...we'll have to create them in the public sector.
Click to expand...

I thought we put that to bed ages ago. Pres Clinton increased taxes, lots of jobs. Pres Bush decreased taxes, jobs didn't increase.

There are other factors involved, of course, but it's pretty obvious that cutting taxes doesn't automatically create jobs. Sorry you have to repeat stuff that's already well-known, Althea.

Productivity has been going up. It just went up again. And yet the income gap continues to grow.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/prod2.nr0.htm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top