Something's not right here ...

Strings said:

I spent the last 34 years of my career in senior management at both a huge Wall St. listed, multinational and a midsize (under $1b) privately held company who hired me to help them operate their business like a publicly traded company. All that own stocks understand the joy when share values increase and the not no happy times when share values decline.

So here's my point: No company - none that realize profits in line with or above what was planned, has ever turned to it's management team and instructed them to, "Hire more people because the company has unexpected profits." Never happened! Never will! Personally, I would question the decision making of any staff member that came to me with the idea of giving raises or increased bonuses because we made more money.

Imagine how you would feel if the stock you held appreciated but then retreated - or perhaps dividends weren't paid, because it was decided to "share" your prosperity with a few hundred Americans the company doesn't really need. Or give big raises because you - the shareholder, would do so for the good of his fellow Americans.

Companies add staff for one reason and one reason only - an increase in demand! That's it!

They also give raises for one reason only - their competitors raised their wage budget. why would you otherwise?

People who want to believe that assembly line, light manufacturing, coal industry, fashion - on and on, jobs will leave their $5 per day labor cost heaven in Asia and return to the US
simply drank too much of the Trickle Down the Kool Aid. It doesn't happen.

In fact, our company owned over 400 individual companies around the world. Nearly $14b in sales in 1985 - bit outfit. It was Beatrice Foods. Spent 19 years with them. I don't have these same values today, but our goals at corporate were realized in simple steps.

1. Identify and acquire profitable companies that FIT our product lines
2. Acquire with stock swaps or acquire share ownership majority, junk bonds (our takeover of Esmark), cash, etc.
3. Then find overlaps (actually this was done as part of the pre-purchase planning), such as duplication is Sales, Accounting - really anyplace in the acquired organization where we could do the work ourselves, and eliminate those folks.
4. Note that we often financed any acquisition debt and charged those expenses to the newly purchased - formally profitable company. Then we milked.

We must have furloughed thousands of people over the years here and around the world. We were hard-nosed and profit driven every day.

Never gave away a thing. And now these companies are suppose to become generous? Do you know who the Koch Brothers are? They will set you straight. It's all theirs and you can't have any.

We at Beatrice felt the same ...

Remember that first tenet of business you learned in your freshman year: "The only reason for any company to exist is to make money for its shareholders."

Click to expand...

Strings said:

I spent the last 34 years of my career in senior management at both a huge Wall St. listed, multinational and a midsize (under $1b) privately held company who hired me to help them operate their business like a publicly traded company. All you all that own stocks understand the joy when share values increase and the not no happy times when share values decline.

So here's my point: No company - none that realize profits in line with or above what was planned, has ever turned to it's management team and instructed them to, "Hire more people because the company has unexpected profits." Never happened! Never will! Personally, I would question the decision making of any staff member that came to me with the idea of giving raises or increased bonuses because we made more money.

Imagine how you would feel if the stock you held appreciated but then retreated - or perhaps dividends weren't paid, because it was decided to "share" your prosperity with a few hundred Americans the company doesn't really need. Or give big raises because you - the shareholder, would do so for the good of his fellow Americans.

Companies add staff for one reason and one reason only - an increase in demand! That's it!

They also give raises for one reason only - their competitors raised their wage budget. why would you otherwise?

People who want to believe that assembly line, light manufacturing, coal industry, fashion - on and on, jobs will leave their $5 per day labor cost heaven in Asia and return to the US
simply drank too much of the Trickle Down the Kool Aid. It doesn't happen.

In fact, our company owned over 400 individual companies around the world. Nearly $14b in sales in 1985 - bit outfit. It was Beatrice Foods. Spent 19 years with them. I don't have these same values today, but our goals at corporate were realized in simple steps.

1. Identify and acquire profitable companies that FIT our product lines
2. Acquire with stock swaps or acquire share ownership majority, junk bonds (our takeover of Esmark), cash, etc.
3. Then find overlaps (actually this was done as part of the pre-purchase planning), such as duplication is Sales, Accounting - really anyplace in the acquired organization where we could do the work ourselves, and eliminate those folks.
4. Note that we often financed any acquisition debt and charged those expenses to the newly purchased - formally profitable company. Then we milked.

We must have furloughed thousands of people over the years here and around the world. We were hard-nosed and profit driven every day.

Never gave away a thing. And now these companies are suppose to become generous? Do you know who the Koch Brothers are? They will set you straight. It's all theirs and you can't have any.

We at Beatrice felt the same ...

Remember that first tenet of business you learned in your freshman year: "The only reason for any company to exist is to make money for its shareholders."

Click to expand...

Strings said:

I spent the last 34 years of my career in senior management at both a huge Wall St. listed, multinational and a midsize (under $1b) privately held company who hired me to help them operate their business like a publicly traded company. All that own stocks understand the joy when share values increase and the not no happy times when share values decline.

So here's my point: No company - none that realize profits in line with or above what was planned, has ever turned to it's management team and instructed them to, "Hire more people because the company has unexpected profits." Never happened! Never will! Personally, I would question the decision making of any staff member that came to me with the idea of giving raises or increased bonuses because we made more money.

Imagine how you would feel if the stock you held appreciated but then retreated - or perhaps dividends weren't paid, because it was decided to "share" your prosperity with a few hundred Americans the company doesn't really need. Or give big raises because you - the shareholder, would do so for the good of his fellow Americans.

Companies add staff for one reason and one reason only - an increase in demand! That's it!

They also give raises for one reason only - their competitors raised their wage budget. why would you otherwise?

People who want to believe that assembly line, light manufacturing, coal industry, fashion - on and on, jobs will leave their $5 per day labor cost heaven in Asia and return to the US
simply drank too much of the Trickle Down the Kool Aid. It doesn't happen.

In fact, our company owned over 400 individual companies around the world. Nearly $14b in sales in 1985 - bit outfit. It was Beatrice Foods. Spent 19 years with them. I don't have these same values today, but our goals at corporate were realized in simple steps.

1. Identify and acquire profitable companies that FIT our product lines
2. Acquire with stock swaps or acquire share ownership majority, junk bonds (our takeover of Esmark), cash, etc.
3. Then find overlaps (actually this was done as part of the pre-purchase planning), such as duplication is Sales, Accounting - really anyplace in the acquired organization where we could do the work ourselves, and eliminate those folks.
4. Note that we often financed any acquisition debt and charged those expenses to the newly purchased - formally profitable company. Then we milked.

We must have furloughed thousands of people over the years here and around the world. We were hard-nosed and profit driven every day.

Never gave away a thing. And now these companies are suppose to become generous? Do you know who the Koch Brothers are? They will set you straight. It's all theirs and you can't have any.

We at Beatrice felt the same ...

Remember that first tenet of business you learned in your freshman year: "The only reason for any company to exist is to make money for its shareholders."

Click to expand...

White House said:

Reducing the statutory federal corporate tax rate from 35 to 20 percent would, the analysis below suggests, increase average household income in the United States by, very conservatively, $4,000 annually.

Click to expand...

Strings said:

I spent the last 34 years of my career in senior management at both a huge Wall St. listed, multinational and a midsize (under $1b) privately held company who hired me to help them operate their business like a publicly traded company. All that own stocks understand the joy when share values increase and the not no happy times when share values decline.

So here's my point: No company - none that realize profits in line with or above what was planned, has ever turned to it's management team and instructed them to, "Hire more people because the company has unexpected profits." Never happened! Never will! Personally, I would question the decision making of any staff member that came to me with the idea of giving raises or increased bonuses because we made more money.

Imagine how you would feel if the stock you held appreciated but then retreated - or perhaps dividends weren't paid, because it was decided to "share" your prosperity with a few hundred Americans the company doesn't really need. Or give big raises because you - the shareholder, would do so for the good of his fellow Americans.

Companies add staff for one reason and one reason only - an increase in demand! That's it!

They also give raises for one reason only - their competitors raised their wage budget. why would you otherwise?

People who want to believe that assembly line, light manufacturing, coal industry, fashion - on and on, jobs will leave their $5 per day labor cost heaven in Asia and return to the US
simply drank too much of the Trickle Down the Kool Aid. It doesn't happen.

In fact, our company owned over 400 individual companies around the world. Nearly $14b in sales in 1985 - bit outfit. It was Beatrice Foods. Spent 19 years with them. I don't have these same values today, but our goals at corporate were realized in simple steps.

1. Identify and acquire profitable companies that FIT our product lines
2. Acquire with stock swaps or acquire share ownership majority, junk bonds (our takeover of Esmark), cash, etc.
3. Then find overlaps (actually this was done as part of the pre-purchase planning), such as duplication is Sales, Accounting - really anyplace in the acquired organization where we could do the work ourselves, and eliminate those folks.
4. Note that we often financed any acquisition debt and charged those expenses to the newly purchased - formally profitable company. Then we milked.

We must have furloughed thousands of people over the years here and around the world. We were hard-nosed and profit driven every day.

Never gave away a thing. And now these companies are suppose to become generous? Do you know who the Koch Brothers are? They will set you straight. It's all theirs and you can't have any.

We at Beatrice felt the same ...

Remember that first tenet of business you learned in your freshman year: "The only reason for any company to exist is to make money for its shareholders."

Click to expand...

Strings said:

I spent the last 34 years of my career in senior management at both a huge Wall St. listed, multinational and a midsize (under $1b) privately held company who hired me to help them operate their business like a publicly traded company. All that own stocks understand the joy when share values increase and the not no happy times when share values decline.

So here's my point: No company - none that realize profits in line with or above what was planned, has ever turned to it's management team and instructed them to, "Hire more people because the company has unexpected profits." Never happened! Never will! Personally, I would question the decision making of any staff member that came to me with the idea of giving raises or increased bonuses because we made more money.

Imagine how you would feel if the stock you held appreciated but then retreated - or perhaps dividends weren't paid, because it was decided to "share" your prosperity with a few hundred Americans the company doesn't really need. Or give big raises because you - the shareholder, would do so for the good of his fellow Americans.

Companies add staff for one reason and one reason only - an increase in demand! That's it!

They also give raises for one reason only - their competitors raised their wage budget. why would you otherwise?

People who want to believe that assembly line, light manufacturing, coal industry, fashion - on and on, jobs will leave their $5 per day labor cost heaven in Asia and return to the US
simply drank too much of the Trickle Down the Kool Aid. It doesn't happen.

In fact, our company owned over 400 individual companies around the world. Nearly $14b in sales in 1985 - bit outfit. It was Beatrice Foods. Spent 19 years with them. I don't have these same values today, but our goals at corporate were realized in simple steps.

1. Identify and acquire profitable companies that FIT our product lines
2. Acquire with stock swaps or acquire share ownership majority, junk bonds (our takeover of Esmark), cash, etc.
3. Then find overlaps (actually this was done as part of the pre-purchase planning), such as duplication is Sales, Accounting - really anyplace in the acquired organization where we could do the work ourselves, and eliminate those folks.
4. Note that we often financed any acquisition debt and charged those expenses to the newly purchased - formally profitable company. Then we milked.

We must have furloughed thousands of people over the years here and around the world. We were hard-nosed and profit driven every day.

Never gave away a thing. And now these companies are suppose to become generous? Do you know who the Koch Brothers are? They will set you straight. It's all theirs and you can't have any.

We at Beatrice felt the same ...

Remember that first tenet of business you learned in your freshman year: "The only reason for any company to exist is to make money for its shareholders."

Click to expand...

Strings said:

I spent the last 34 years of my career in senior management at both a huge Wall St. listed, multinational and a midsize (under $1b) privately held company who hired me to help them operate their business like a publicly traded company. All that own stocks understand the joy when share values increase and the not no happy times when share values decline.

So here's my point: No company - none that realize profits in line with or above what was planned, has ever turned to it's management team and instructed them to, "Hire more people because the company has unexpected profits." Never happened! Never will! Personally, I would question the decision making of any staff member that came to me with the idea of giving raises or increased bonuses because we made more money.

Imagine how you would feel if the stock you held appreciated but then retreated - or perhaps dividends weren't paid, because it was decided to "share" your prosperity with a few hundred Americans the company doesn't really need. Or give big raises because you - the shareholder, would do so for the good of his fellow Americans.

Companies add staff for one reason and one reason only - an increase in demand! That's it!

They also give raises for one reason only - their competitors raised their wage budget. why would you otherwise?

People who want to believe that assembly line, light manufacturing, coal industry, fashion - on and on, jobs will leave their $5 per day labor cost heaven in Asia and return to the US
simply drank too much of the Trickle Down the Kool Aid. It doesn't happen.

In fact, our company owned over 400 individual companies around the world. Nearly $14b in sales in 1985 - bit outfit. It was Beatrice Foods. Spent 19 years with them. I don't have these same values today, but our goals at corporate were realized in simple steps.

1. Identify and acquire profitable companies that FIT our product lines
2. Acquire with stock swaps or acquire share ownership majority, junk bonds (our takeover of Esmark), cash, etc.
3. Then find overlaps (actually this was done as part of the pre-purchase planning), such as duplication is Sales, Accounting - really anyplace in the acquired organization where we could do the work ourselves, and eliminate those folks.
4. Note that we often financed any acquisition debt and charged those expenses to the newly purchased - formally profitable company. Then we milked.

We must have furloughed thousands of people over the years here and around the world. We were hard-nosed and profit driven every day.

Never gave away a thing. And now these companies are suppose to become generous? Do you know who the Koch Brothers are? They will set you straight. It's all theirs and you can't have any.

We at Beatrice felt the same ...

Remember that first tenet of business you learned in your freshman year: "The only reason for any company to exist is to make money for its shareholders."

Click to expand...

brothern said:

The claim that Strings is commenting upon,



https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/documents/Tax Reform and Wages.pdf

Click to expand...

Hawkeye10 said:

During the early 70's corporate America added many unqualified Blacks to payrolls at the urging of Nixon in the attempt to head off more riots, so I reject your claim.

The major question on the table now is this: Do the corporate class anymore care enough about America to make an effort to hire Americans over others.

I tend to doubt it, I think they are wedded to this sick globalism that they have produced.

Click to expand...

Strings said:

I spent the last 34 years of my career in senior management at both a huge Wall St. listed, multinational and a midsize (under $1b) privately held company who hired me to help them operate their business like a publicly traded company. All that own stocks understand the joy when share values increase and the not no happy times when share values decline.

So here's my point: No company - none that realize profits in line with or above what was planned, has ever turned to it's management team and instructed them to, "Hire more people because the company has unexpected profits." Never happened! Never will! Personally, I would question the decision making of any staff member that came to me with the idea of giving raises or increased bonuses because we made more money.

Imagine how you would feel if the stock you held appreciated but then retreated - or perhaps dividends weren't paid, because it was decided to "share" your prosperity with a few hundred Americans the company doesn't really need. Or give big raises because you - the shareholder, would do so for the good of his fellow Americans.

Companies add staff for one reason and one reason only - an increase in demand! That's it!

They also give raises for one reason only - their competitors raised their wage budget. why would you otherwise?

People who want to believe that assembly line, light manufacturing, coal industry, fashion - on and on, jobs will leave their $5 per day labor cost heaven in Asia and return to the US
simply drank too much of the Trickle Down the Kool Aid. It doesn't happen.

In fact, our company owned over 400 individual companies around the world. Nearly $14b in sales in 1985 - bit outfit. It was Beatrice Foods. Spent 19 years with them. I don't have these same values today, but our goals at corporate were realized in simple steps.

1. Identify and acquire profitable companies that FIT our product lines
2. Acquire with stock swaps or acquire share ownership majority, junk bonds (our takeover of Esmark), cash, etc.
3. Then find overlaps (actually this was done as part of the pre-purchase planning), such as duplication is Sales, Accounting - really anyplace in the acquired organization where we could do the work ourselves, and eliminate those folks.
4. Note that we often financed any acquisition debt and charged those expenses to the newly purchased - formally profitable company. Then we milked.

We must have furloughed thousands of people over the years here and around the world. We were hard-nosed and profit driven every day.

Never gave away a thing. And now these companies are suppose to become generous? Do you know who the Koch Brothers are? They will set you straight. It's all theirs and you can't have any.

We at Beatrice felt the same ...

Remember that first tenet of business you learned in your freshman year: "The only reason for any company to exist is to make money for its shareholders."

Click to expand...

trouble13 said:

Whats not right about it?

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

trouble13 said:

This is why we need correctly set tariffs

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Strings said:

...
Companies add staff for one reason and one reason only - an increase in demand! That's it!
...

Click to expand...

A. Because Keynesian economists believe the primary factor driving economic activity and short-term fluctuations is the demand for goods and services, the theory is sometimes called demand-side economics. This perspective is at odds with classical economic theory, or supply-side economics, which states the production of goods or services, or supply, is of primary importance in economic growth.
...
Keynes maintained that unemployment is the result of an insufficient demand for goods. During the Great Depression, factories sat idle and workers were unemployed because there was not enough of a demand for those products. In turn, factories had insufficient demand for workers. Because of this lack of aggregate demand, unemployment persisted and, contrary to classical theories of economics, the market was not able to self-correct and restore balance.
...

Click to expand...

trouble13 said:

This is why we need correctly set tariffs

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Strings said:

I spent the last 34 years of my career in senior management at both a huge Wall St. listed, multinational and a midsize (under $1b) privately held company who hired me to help them operate their business like a publicly traded company. All that own stocks understand the joy when share values increase and the not no happy times when share values decline.

So here's my point: No company - none that realize profits in line with or above what was planned, has ever turned to it's management team and instructed them to, "Hire more people because the company has unexpected profits." Never happened! Never will! Personally, I would question the decision making of any staff member that came to me with the idea of giving raises or increased bonuses because we made more money.

Imagine how you would feel if the stock you held appreciated but then retreated - or perhaps dividends weren't paid, because it was decided to "share" your prosperity with a few hundred Americans the company doesn't really need. Or give big raises because you - the shareholder, would do so for the good of his fellow Americans.

Companies add staff for one reason and one reason only - an increase in demand! That's it!

They also give raises for one reason only - their competitors raised their wage budget. why would you otherwise?

People who want to believe that assembly line, light manufacturing, coal industry, fashion - on and on, jobs will leave their $5 per day labor cost heaven in Asia and return to the US
simply drank too much of the Trickle Down the Kool Aid. It doesn't happen.

In fact, our company owned over 400 individual companies around the world. Nearly $14b in sales in 1985 - bit outfit. It was Beatrice Foods. Spent 19 years with them. I don't have these same values today, but our goals at corporate were realized in simple steps.

1. Identify and acquire profitable companies that FIT our product lines
2. Acquire with stock swaps or acquire share ownership majority, junk bonds (our takeover of Esmark), cash, etc.
3. Then find overlaps (actually this was done as part of the pre-purchase planning), such as duplication is Sales, Accounting - really anyplace in the acquired organization where we could do the work ourselves, and eliminate those folks.
4. Note that we often financed any acquisition debt and charged those expenses to the newly purchased - formally profitable company. Then we milked.

We must have furloughed thousands of people over the years here and around the world. We were hard-nosed and profit driven every day.

Never gave away a thing. And now these companies are suppose to become generous? Do you know who the Koch Brothers are? They will set you straight. It's all theirs and you can't have any.

We at Beatrice felt the same ...

Remember that first tenet of business you learned in your freshman year: "The only reason for any company to exist is to make money for its shareholders."

Click to expand...

Lutherf said:

That's a little shortsighted.

When profits are up and capital is relatively easy to come by there is greater opportunity for speculation such as exploring new markets or expanding services. Additional capital also opens the opportunity for infrastructure improvements and R&D.

Click to expand...

MaggieD said:

Put more money in the hands of the Uber rich, and they will buy more yachts, more diamonds, take more luxurious vacations, add more personal staff, buy more expensive cars, and on and on. The more $$ in consumers’ hands, the more they will spend. The greater the demand. The more hires.

That may be wrong, but it’s uneducated Maggie’s opinion based on common sense. Love the post though.

Click to expand...

Lutherf said:

That's a little shortsighted.

When profits are up and capital is relatively easy to come by there is greater opportunity for speculation such as exploring new markets or expanding services. Additional capital also opens the opportunity for infrastructure improvements and R&D.

Click to expand...

brothern said:

Except the concentration of wealth in America wouldn't allow that to happen. The 10% wealthiest Americas own 75% of the US' net worth. That entire group of 32M Americans spending additional money even on luxury items has a very limited impact upon economic growth - there's just so few of them, and their pockets are already deep.

Or said another way, after a couple of folks bought their 3rd yacht ... it doesn't make sense to spend the money to buy a 4th.

Likewise the 90% poorest Americas own 25% of the US' net worth. That group is 291M strong. That group receiving the same amount of money that which the uber rich are going to get from the Republican tax plan would have a far larger impact upon net consumption and spending.

Simply because there's more of them (thus better capacity to spend money) as well as a more varied set of needs (received monies would not go unspent).

Click to expand...

poweRob said:

Instead they offshore it and do stock buy-backs to increase their stock options pay.

As evidenced by the "Paradise Papers" and the "Panama Papers".

This is the reality over the gloriouis manner that republicans always try to sell it as where we are all supposed to be joyously and magically become rich as the filthy rich magnanimously dole out money to the rest of us.

Republican trickle down is a failure as always.

Click to expand...

Strings said:

Remember that first tenet of business you learned in your freshman year: "The only reason for any company to exist is to make money for its shareholders."

Click to expand...

Strings said:

I spent the last 34 years of my career in senior management at both a huge Wall St. listed, multinational and a midsize (under $1b) privately held company who hired me to help them operate their business like a publicly traded company. All that own stocks understand the joy when share values increase and the not no happy times when share values decline.

So here's my point: No company - none that realize profits in line with or above what was planned, has ever turned to it's management team and instructed them to, "Hire more people because the company has unexpected profits." Never happened! Never will! Personally, I would question the decision making of any staff member that came to me with the idea of giving raises or increased bonuses because we made more money.

Imagine how you would feel if the stock you held appreciated but then retreated - or perhaps dividends weren't paid, because it was decided to "share" your prosperity with a few hundred Americans the company doesn't really need. Or give big raises because you - the shareholder, would do so for the good of his fellow Americans.

Companies add staff for one reason and one reason only - an increase in demand! That's it!

They also give raises for one reason only - their competitors raised their wage budget. why would you otherwise?

People who want to believe that assembly line, light manufacturing, coal industry, fashion - on and on, jobs will leave their $5 per day labor cost heaven in Asia and return to the US
simply drank too much of the Trickle Down the Kool Aid. It doesn't happen.

In fact, our company owned over 400 individual companies around the world. Nearly $14b in sales in 1985 - bit outfit. It was Beatrice Foods. Spent 19 years with them. I don't have these same values today, but our goals at corporate were realized in simple steps.

1. Identify and acquire profitable companies that FIT our product lines
2. Acquire with stock swaps or acquire share ownership majority, junk bonds (our takeover of Esmark), cash, etc.
3. Then find overlaps (actually this was done as part of the pre-purchase planning), such as duplication is Sales, Accounting - really anyplace in the acquired organization where we could do the work ourselves, and eliminate those folks.
4. Note that we often financed any acquisition debt and charged those expenses to the newly purchased - formally profitable company. Then we milked.

We must have furloughed thousands of people over the years here and around the world. We were hard-nosed and profit driven every day.

Never gave away a thing. And now these companies are suppose to become generous? Do you know who the Koch Brothers are? They will set you straight. It's all theirs and you can't have any.

We at Beatrice felt the same ...

Remember that first tenet of business you learned in your freshman year: "The only reason for any company to exist is to make money for its shareholders."

Click to expand...

Lutherf said:

Well, the idea of lowering the corporate rate is to stop some of that offshoring. Also, as a rule, the reasons for rebuying stock (treasury stock) can be a number of things. Maybe the corporation wants to manipulate its EPS or increase shareholder equity.

Click to expand...