• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Kimberly-Clark says tax bill helps fund plan that includes more than 5,000 layoffs

JMaximus said:
Huh?

The post you quoted, and specifically the part right before what you bolded, presented demand as the driving force behind economic activity:

"It comes from everybody buying products, thus stimulating more production, thus more hiring to make and sell those products."
Click to expand...

Which is why I bolded what I did, and didn't bold what I didn't. Supply-side seeks to directly drive supply -- production -- so that the same effect takes place. Even in the formulation given, supply drives employment, which then drives demand.

Most people don't understand what supply-side is, and the post was an illustration of not understanding it. Which is why I posted. Anyone who actually understands supply-side would understand that.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Yep, if taxes hadn't been cut then their business would have gotten better for sure - look it up.
Click to expand...

Tax cuts have nothing to do with how their business is doing. As Kimberly-Clark reported, their sales have dropped. All the tax cuts are doing is allowing them to increase their dividend payments to their shareholders while making investments that allow them to terminate employees.

“We also anticipate ongoing annual cash flow benefits from tax reform,” Henry said. “That provides us flexibility to continue to allocate significant capital to shareholders while we also fund increased capital spending and our restructuring program over the next few years.”
Click to expand...

“We are moving to a global business services platform for our more transactional and standard work,” Henry said Tuesday. “And when you do that, when you think about it, we are removing a role that is in country, so we are paying the full severance on that position that we are taking out, and we are hiring that role in a different location in our shared services center.”
Click to expand...

IOW, while this tax cut is increasing capital investments as predicted by republicans, the investments will result in jobs being shipped overseas. So the benefits are accruing to shareholders --as predicted by the tax cut critics-- and not to American workers
 
Barnacle said:
See my post #8.

However, I found an article from CNBC that said :" ... Kimberly-Clark would join a number of its consumer peers like Unilever and Nestle that have looked to shed underperforming businesses as scrutiny intensifies. ..."

So, are you saying Trump's tax reform caused the business to underperform?!?
Click to expand...

No, the tax cut has NOTHING to do with KCs performance. But it has provided KC with money to invest in outsourcing American jobs
 
JMaximus said:
Huh?

The post you quoted, and specifically the part right before what you bolded, presented demand as the driving force behind economic activity:

"It comes from everybody buying products, thus stimulating more production, thus more hiring to make and sell those products."
Click to expand...

That was not the only thing Harshaw ignored. He also ignored the main issue of this thread --the layoffs-- in order to claim the tax cuts are increasing hiring.
 
Phys251 said:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...nd-plan-that-includes-more-than-5000-layoffs/





So much for trickle-down! :thumbdown
Click to expand...

But some companies paid a measly $1000 to some employees as a bribe, surely it must work (sarcasm). That's what the ignorants will say anyway. They have ignored 40 years of the rich getting richer, the middle class dying, increased poverty, all while the companies continue to get tax break after tax break

It's worse today than it was before the Great Depression. Nothing ever good comes out with such a small amount of people have all the wealth
 
Harshaw said:
Which is why I bolded what I did, and didn't bold what I didn't. Supply-side seeks to directly drive supply -- production -- so that the same effect takes place. Even in the formulation given, supply drives employment, which then drives demand.

Most people don't understand what supply-side is, and the post was an illustration of not understanding it. Which is why I posted. Anyone who actually understands supply-side would understand that.
Click to expand...

Umm, no.

As the example shows, KC is neither increasing production nor increasing employment. It is using this tax windfall to invest in outsourcing jobs and to continue paying dividends.

Dont know why you think making more diapers is going to increase demand for diapers when no one says "I think I will go out and buy a bunch of diapers now that I have all this extra money from my new job"
 
sangha said:
Umm, no.

As the example shows, KC is neither increasing production nor increasing employment. It is using this tax windfall to invest in outsourcing jobs and to continue paying dividends.

Dont know why you think making more diapers is going to increase demand for diapers when no one says "I think I will go out and buy a bunch of diapers now that I have all this extra money from my new job"
Click to expand...

:roll: You should try harder to understand what you're responding to. Just a tip. Have a good day.
 
Harshaw said:
:roll: You should try harder to understand what you're responding to. Just a tip. Have a good day.
Click to expand...

I accept your surrender

It was probably your smartest move here seeing as how KCs actions directly contradict the claims of supply siders such as yourself.

Next time, try harder not to fail
 
The tax-cut is indeed enabling cutting 5,000 jobs a KC.

Restructurings typically come with upfront costs for the companies, as they pay workers severance or renegotiate leases. In a conference call with analysts on Tuesday, Kimberly-Clark’s chief financial officer, Maria Henry, said “cash flow benefits” from the Republican tax cut would help fund “the restructuring program over the next few years.” She said the tax savings would also be used to make capital investments and to “allocate significant capital to shareholders.”
Click to expand...
 
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/08/07/opinion/leonhardt-income-inequality.html

This has a chart that is perfect, it shows changes in the last 34 years of who got what out of economic growth, and watch the change from almost even growth to the growth predominately going to the top 2%, its staggering. And some people cheered these people getting billions in tax breaks. It's breathtaking how far gone these people are in their propaganda that they can deny this.

There is tons of data showing as the corporate tax rate kept going down, the wealth of the top went up while the wealth of the rest stagnated. Since the recession, 85% of the new economic growht went to the 1%. How is that a sustainable model, 1% of the country having 90% or more of the wealth?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom