• 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!

Harley-Davidson cut jobs, repurchased shares after tax cut

LOL, and yet we hit a record for job openings. Over a million long term unemployed and part time workers have joined the full time work force. And it's still early.

Yeah, it's a Golden Age for burger flippers and WalMart greeters.

Ask a teacher how their job market is.
 
Why is this even an issue? Harley sales are down. They're buying back stock - so what? That generates tax revenue. You wanna help go buy a Harley.
Stock buybacks do not generate tax revenue.
 
If Trump hadn't used Harley as a prop for his ignorant, deceitful stagecraft, I'm sure the news reports would be different.
 
Harley won't be selling bikes assembled in Thailand in the US. Those bikes will be sold in China and southeastern Asia.

So yes, the lack of sales in the US closed the assembly plant here.

But but but... the tax cuts were supposed to allow American factories to stay open by making us more competitive. Why couldn't we just export those bikes?
 
So you don't see that the 14% reduction in taxes and the reinvesting in buying back outstanding shares as a way to keep the business afloat, there by keeping thousands of people employed?
Buying back a company's own shares is when the company buys shares from shareholders and merely puts it in the company's treasury. It never adds or subtracts value of the company nor is it reinvestment. It's just a way of enriching shareholders.

If you remember way back to December, those that pushed the tax-cut said that companies would invest in their companies and in their employees. That's just not what is happening. (please see the article in post #1.)
 
But but but... the tax cuts were supposed to allow American factories to stay open by making us more competitive. Why couldn't we just export those bikes?

Hard to do for companies that were punished by Obama's rules ...

"... Around October 2016, Harley Davidson had to pay a $12 million penalty to the federal government due to an accusation of selling around 340,000 motorcycles that polluted the air at a rate higher than the federal Clean Air Act allows. ..." (see post #20)
 
But but but... the tax cuts were supposed to allow American factories to stay open by making us more competitive. Why couldn't we just export those bikes?

Harley's problems were well known long before any tax cuts came down the pike.

Expense
 
So you don't see that the 14% reduction in taxes and the reinvesting in buying back outstanding shares as a way to keep the business afloat, there by keeping thousands of people employed?

Businesses don't operate like that. They won't "stay afloat" in America when they can be more profitable in Thailand; that would just be charity for the workers. All this tax cut does is make a profitable business more profitable, and that doesn't trickle down to labor; it all stays at the top.

That's why skeptics saw this tax cut for the bull$#!t legislation that it was, a giveaway to the rich. You don't give the rich a pile of money in the hopes that they will give some of their windfall back to labor - that's just stupid (or smart, if your intention all along was to give more money to the rich). If you want to help labor, you legislate to help them directly - lower their taxes, create incentives to keep American plants open, etc.
 
Hard to do for companies that were punished by Obama's rules ...

"... Around October 2016, Harley Davidson had to pay a $12 million penalty to the federal government due to an accusation of selling around 340,000 motorcycles that polluted the air at a rate higher than the federal Clean Air Act allows. ..." (see post #20)

So your solution is to allow them to break the law? Great idea. Maybe if they were allowed to dump their waste into the nearest stream, they could save a few bucks that way, too. Surely, they would then pass on the savings to their employees, right?
 
Hard to do for companies that were punished by Obama's rules ...

"... Around October 2016, Harley Davidson had to pay a $12 million penalty to the federal government due to an accusation of selling around 340,000 motorcycles that polluted the air at a rate higher than the federal Clean Air Act allows. ..." (see post #20)
Shouldn't companies pay fines for violating air pollution standards or should we just breathe polluted air?
 
So your solution is to allow them to break the law? Great idea. Maybe if they were allowed to dump their waste into the nearest stream, they could save a few bucks that way, too. Surely, they would then pass on the savings to their employees, right?

Wow, that was a good one ... ha ha ha.

If HD wasn't able to comply with Obama laws and change their design, the writing for their demise was on the wall.

Don't you think so?!?
 
Hard to do for companies that were punished by Obama's rules ...

"... Around October 2016, Harley Davidson had to pay a $12 million penalty to the federal government due to an accusation of selling around 340,000 motorcycles that polluted the air at a rate higher than the federal Clean Air Act allows. ..." (see post #20)

And that was a bad thing?
 
But but but... the tax cuts were supposed to allow American factories to stay open by making us more competitive. Why couldn't we just export those bikes?

Export them? Day's coming when America will import Harleys. There's a small but vocal market share who will be supremely pissed off about that.
 
Buying back a company's own shares is when the company buys shares from shareholders and merely puts it in the company's treasury. It never adds or subtracts value of the company nor is it reinvestment. It's just a way of enriching shareholders.

If you remember way back to December, those that pushed the tax-cut said that companies would invest in their companies and in their employees. That's just not what is happening. (please see the article in post #1.)

Not exactly.

Stock buybacks are a form of investment in the company.

Read up;

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/02/041702.asp
 
Wow, that was a good one ... ha ha ha.

If HD wasn't able to comply with Obama laws and change their design, the writing for their demise was on the wall.

Don't you think so?!?

You can't blame Obama for their poor planning. Other companies were under the same constraints.
 

Yep. Right here:

"Hard to do for companies that were punished by Obama's rules ..."

All companies were under the same constraints. Some did fine, HD did not.
 
Stock buybacks do not generate tax revenue.
Yeah they do. If you sell your stock back to the company at a profit you have a capital gain.
 
Can liberals even afford a Harley?That's a rich conservative mans bike.
 
it started about a year ago, when trump said, "a lot of countries are taking advantage of us," during a press briefing with the executives and union members."thank you harley-davidson for building things in america," trump said during his remarks.


this is now, i think the worker at harley are getting tired of winning.

suckers!
 
Back
Top Bottom