3 ms·

How much of the capital would realistically go to those, as opposed to shareholder payouts?

by thrillgore 10y ago

xmj 10y ago
Realistically what do you think shareholders do with payouts?
- frebord 10y ago
  Shareholder's are investors, investors invest.
  - xmj 10y ago
    Then why insist on dividends, and not have companies reinvest?
    - WJW 10y ago
      Because they might want to diversify into areas other than where the company operates in?
    - civilian 10y ago
      Sometimes a company has matured, where it's captured most of it's market and it's been around so long that it's not very innovative. A company can be good at just "doing it's thing", and that's okay. But that means that--- if there is not more of the market that a company can efficiently capture, then it's time for the shareholders to reap their ROI. I'm sure you've seen lots of instances of failed innovation in big companies. This is a way to avoid it, and put money where it'll have better odds.
  - dsparkman 10y ago
    Shareholder's are speculators, speculators speculate. Most US public companies do not pay dividends to shareholders. An "investment" in this scenario is not an investment but speculation. You are speculating that you can convince others to pay more for my shares than I paid for them.
jrmurad 10y ago
Wouldn't many such shareholders be Americans as well? Americans who could do something more productive with these payouts than the government might with taxes? (Non-American shareholders could similarly reinvest these payouts in things which improve the global economy and, by extension, the livelihoods of Americans.)
maxerickson 10y ago
One of the arguments for lower corporate taxes is to move the taxation to the shareholders.
dmix 10y ago
Only a small percentage of companies are public and have CEOs making giant bounces off of tax cuts. This worldview that Bernie Sanders esque people hold, where every business person is a rich multi millionaire, ignores the reality of business... where the vast majority are small and medium sized businesses. The critique of George Bush's temporary tax credit was that it was used as bonuses rather than stimulating the economy. But a long term tax reduction is something you can actually plan for with expenditures like R&D. I've seen many people comparing the two disingenuously like they are the same. They aren't, that's not how business finance works. There have also been a number of examples in history where reducing the tax rate has actually increased tax revenue as companies are much more productive and more capital is available to invest in industry. The more revenue companies generate the more taxable income there is both from the company revenue and the incomes of employees they hire.
- aanm1988 10y ago
  Didn't sanders tax plan involve closing loopholes used by big companies and taxing the wealthy more heavily? Neither of which would hurt your precious small businesses. They would hurt the corporate overlords though.
  - dmix 10y ago
    > Didn't sanders tax plan involve closing loopholes used by big companies and taxing the wealthy more heavily? Steve Mnuchin talked about closing these by simplifying the tax code during his senate hearing. This was Ted Cruz primary pitch for his tax plan... and in general on of the staples of tax reform people on both sides of the party. Bernie Sanders also said he would be comfortable with a 90% top tax bracket too, which completely failed when the socialist party tried to do it in France. Regardless, the goal should be increasing tax revenue, not tax rates. And the US government already takes in a massive amount of money. There's probably a million ways for it to be better spent and still dramatically improve the social safety nets and offer public healthcare. Yet whenever these goals are discussed it's always in the context of adding more and more spending. And re: closing loopholes, the usual result of these efforts such as Obama's various attempts, were to add even more complexity to the tax code. There are many ways to reach a goal. Just because you want lower taxes and a dramatically simplified tax code doesn't mean I'm against social policies.

How much of the capital would realistically go to those, as opposed to shareholder payouts?

xmj 10y ago

Realistically what do you think shareholders do with payouts?

frebord 10y ago
Shareholder's are investors, investors invest.
- xmj 10y ago
  Then why insist on dividends, and not have companies reinvest?
  - WJW 10y ago
    Because they might want to diversify into areas other than where the company operates in?
  - civilian 10y ago
    Sometimes a company has matured, where it's captured most of it's market and it's been around so long that it's not very innovative. A company can be good at just "doing it's thing", and that's okay. But that means that--- if there is not more of the market that a company can efficiently capture, then it's time for the shareholders to reap their ROI. I'm sure you've seen lots of instances of failed innovation in big companies. This is a way to avoid it, and put money where it'll have better odds.
- dsparkman 10y ago
  Shareholder's are speculators, speculators speculate. Most US public companies do not pay dividends to shareholders. An "investment" in this scenario is not an investment but speculation. You are speculating that you can convince others to pay more for my shares than I paid for them.

jrmurad 10y ago

Wouldn't many such shareholders be Americans as well? Americans who could do something more productive with these payouts than the government might with taxes? (Non-American shareholders could similarly reinvest these payouts in things which improve the global economy and, by extension, the livelihoods of Americans.)

maxerickson 10y ago

One of the arguments for lower corporate taxes is to move the taxation to the shareholders.

dmix 10y ago

Only a small percentage of companies are public and have CEOs making giant bounces off of tax cuts. This worldview that Bernie Sanders esque people hold, where every business person is a rich multi millionaire, ignores the reality of business... where the vast majority are small and medium sized businesses. The critique of George Bush's temporary tax credit was that it was used as bonuses rather than stimulating the economy. But a long term tax reduction is something you can actually plan for with expenditures like R&D. I've seen many people comparing the two disingenuously like they are the same. They aren't, that's not how business finance works. There have also been a number of examples in history where reducing the tax rate has actually increased tax revenue as companies are much more productive and more capital is available to invest in industry. The more revenue companies generate the more taxable income there is both from the company revenue and the incomes of employees they hire.

aanm1988 10y ago
Didn't sanders tax plan involve closing loopholes used by big companies and taxing the wealthy more heavily? Neither of which would hurt your precious small businesses. They would hurt the corporate overlords though.
- dmix 10y ago
  > Didn't sanders tax plan involve closing loopholes used by big companies and taxing the wealthy more heavily? Steve Mnuchin talked about closing these by simplifying the tax code during his senate hearing. This was Ted Cruz primary pitch for his tax plan... and in general on of the staples of tax reform people on both sides of the party. Bernie Sanders also said he would be comfortable with a 90% top tax bracket too, which completely failed when the socialist party tried to do it in France. Regardless, the goal should be increasing tax revenue, not tax rates. And the US government already takes in a massive amount of money. There's probably a million ways for it to be better spent and still dramatically improve the social safety nets and offer public healthcare. Yet whenever these goals are discussed it's always in the context of adding more and more spending. And re: closing loopholes, the usual result of these efforts such as Obama's various attempts, were to add even more complexity to the tax code. There are many ways to reach a goal. Just because you want lower taxes and a dramatically simplified tax code doesn't mean I'm against social policies.