3 ms·

> I've heard about have been laughable so far Having been poor, then living on $750/month in US for many years, a $1000 bonus is not life changing but also not

by rdtsc 9y ago

> I've heard about have been laughable so far Having been poor, then living on $750/month in US for many years, a $1000 bonus is not life changing but also not laughable. The companies certainly didn't have to give those and could have pocketed all of it. > large lay offs in two cases (Walmart and Comcast). Are those because of the tax incentives?

dragonwriter 9y ago
> Are those because of the tax incentives? Decreasing taxes on retained profits increases the incentive to cut any activity that is a short term loss rather than trying to turn it around. Because business expenses are deductible from corporate “income” taxes, they are functionally retained profits taxes. So, yes, the tax cuts incentivized the layoffs.
- rdtsc 9y ago
  Would it work to argue that increasing taxes also is an incentive for layoffs? Higher taxes, means lower profit margins, means some product lines become unsustainable so departments are closed and people are laid off. So lower taxes means people are laid off, higher taxes means they are laid off. What tax structure would give them an incentive _not_ to lay people off? They are basically closing off 60 Sam's Clubs. When is the last time you went to Sam's Club? Do you know anyone who goes there regularly? I don't. I had membership many years ago. Many will be converted to e-distribution centers. Guessing this has little to do with taxes and more to do with new year reorg to compete with Amazon. Otherwise, what would you do? What kind of incentives would you give to Walmart to save those Sam's Club workers?
geofft 9y ago
> Having been poor, then living on $750/month in US for many years, a $1000 bonus is not life changing but also not laughable. But for rich and poor alike, a layoff is definitely life-changing....
- rdtsc 9y ago
  > But for rich and poor alike, a layoff is definitely life-changing.... Agree there, no doubt, most people would rather have a job than a $1000 bonus. But what does that mean in this context? Should Walmart keep those 60 Sam's Club stores open at a loss to avoid laying people off? Should the government subsidize them? Maybe it should break apart Amazon because a lot of those location will become e-distribution centers. What would you have done. How would you have saved those Sam's Clubs workers? I am curious, not being sarcastic or tricky? I'd suggest breaking Amazon into regional companies like they did with AT&T. Or maybe breaking AWS away from Amazon-retail business.
jasonlotito 9y ago
> a $1000 bonus That's up to a $1000 bonus. That's if you've been working there for 20 years.
e40 9y ago
For me the laughable part is that it's a small part of the benefits corporates will reap and some of the companies are also doing layoffs, as has been commented on by others.
seanmcdirmid 9y ago
You only get the full $1000 if you worked for Walmart full time for 20 years. It’s not like you would still get much if you were a typical Walmart employee.
- rdtsc 9y ago
  Walmart is not the only company which gave bonuses. AT&T did the same. Apple gave employees $2500. Overall that is a quite a bit of people who got something they probably would not have gotten otherwise. Yeah, it would be nice to have free healthcare, basic income other things. But to someone making minimum age $1000 is a nice holiday gift. Why not be happy for them?
  - seanmcdirmid 9y ago
    I'm pretty sure no one who was making minimum wage got a $1000 bonus (including at Walmart, who would be making min wage after being there for 20 years? Sounds like a store manager or district sup to me). So I'm not happy for them because they don't exist.
    - rdtsc 9y ago
      AT&T claimed that it paid the bonus to 200k employees https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/20/tax-reform-reaction-att-is-giving-bonuses-to-200000-employees.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/20/tax-reform-reaction-att-is-g... They have a total of about 250k employees worldwide: https://www.att.com/Common/about_us/pdf/att_btn.pdf https://www.att.com/Common/about_us/pdf/att_btn.pdf. Pretty sure there 80% of their workforce are not district supervisors and store managers. Comcast said it paid the bonus to 100k employees "that are eligible and not in executive roles". > So I'm not happy for them because they don't exist. Good news, I think I found them!
      - seanmcdirmid 9y ago
        I’m pretty sure AT&T and Comcast don’t employ many min wage workers, especially not like Walmart does, if any at all. > Comcast said it paid the bonus to 100k employees "that are eligible and not in executive roles". But neither did they say they were making min wage. And then ... > Good news, I think I found them! You aren’t making a valid inference here, it honestly feels like something Trump would claim.
FireBeyond 9y ago
> a $1000 bonus For 20+ year employees. At 10 years the bonus was, IIRC, $190. IMHO, "laughable".
- rdtsc 9y ago
  Walmart is not the only company which did this. Other companies raised their minimum wages and also gave $1000 or $2500 bonuses (Apple did that too I think). Why not be happy for them they got something for the holidays. Sure we are all software developers expecting 6 figure salaries, RSUs, options and $50k bonuses every year, $1000 is nothing, I get it. Though someone working at an AT&T store in Columbus, OH or Kansas would be quite happy to get $1000. it's disappointing and I'd wish they all had large salaries and thought $1000 is insulting just like we do. In general we would rather have free healthcare, and other things we like to talk about here, but those probably are not going to happen in this country at his point in time. But why not be happy for these people at least or say that it is nice for Apple to pay some taxes and invest in US as opposed to stashing it away for another 20 years.
dguaraglia 9y ago
A $1000 bonus, after taxes, is not a $1000 bonus. While an extra ~$700 might be a nice windfall for someone making minimum wage, it's hardly a life-changing event that will have an durable impact in their life. What companies are doing is exactly what they were expected to do: make some "feel good" moves for a bit to validate the tax plan as a "resounding success" until the midterm elections, then do whatever they want. I've seen these incredible displays of "corporate goodwill" after tax breaks like this to know they are always temporary and self-serving (I grew up in a country where these "booms" happened like clockwork every 8 or so years.)
rkuykendall-com 9y ago
> $1000 bonus is not life changing but also not laughable. > The companies certainly didn't have to give those and could have pocketed all of it. Now imagine if the tax give-away would have gone completely to workers. That would be life changing.

by rdtsc 9y ago

dragonwriter 9y ago

> Are those because of the tax incentives? Decreasing taxes on retained profits increases the incentive to cut any activity that is a short term loss rather than trying to turn it around. Because business expenses are deductible from corporate “income” taxes, they are functionally retained profits taxes. So, yes, the tax cuts incentivized the layoffs.

rdtsc 9y ago
Would it work to argue that increasing taxes also is an incentive for layoffs? Higher taxes, means lower profit margins, means some product lines become unsustainable so departments are closed and people are laid off. So lower taxes means people are laid off, higher taxes means they are laid off. What tax structure would give them an incentive _not_ to lay people off? They are basically closing off 60 Sam's Clubs. When is the last time you went to Sam's Club? Do you know anyone who goes there regularly? I don't. I had membership many years ago. Many will be converted to e-distribution centers. Guessing this has little to do with taxes and more to do with new year reorg to compete with Amazon. Otherwise, what would you do? What kind of incentives would you give to Walmart to save those Sam's Club workers?

geofft 9y ago

> Having been poor, then living on $750/month in US for many years, a $1000 bonus is not life changing but also not laughable. But for rich and poor alike, a layoff is definitely life-changing....

rdtsc 9y ago
> But for rich and poor alike, a layoff is definitely life-changing.... Agree there, no doubt, most people would rather have a job than a $1000 bonus. But what does that mean in this context? Should Walmart keep those 60 Sam's Club stores open at a loss to avoid laying people off? Should the government subsidize them? Maybe it should break apart Amazon because a lot of those location will become e-distribution centers. What would you have done. How would you have saved those Sam's Clubs workers? I am curious, not being sarcastic or tricky? I'd suggest breaking Amazon into regional companies like they did with AT&T. Or maybe breaking AWS away from Amazon-retail business.

jasonlotito 9y ago

> a $1000 bonus That's up to a $1000 bonus. That's if you've been working there for 20 years.

e40 9y ago

For me the laughable part is that it's a small part of the benefits corporates will reap and some of the companies are also doing layoffs, as has been commented on by others.

seanmcdirmid 9y ago

You only get the full $1000 if you worked for Walmart full time for 20 years. It’s not like you would still get much if you were a typical Walmart employee.

rdtsc 9y ago
Walmart is not the only company which gave bonuses. AT&T did the same. Apple gave employees $2500. Overall that is a quite a bit of people who got something they probably would not have gotten otherwise. Yeah, it would be nice to have free healthcare, basic income other things. But to someone making minimum age $1000 is a nice holiday gift. Why not be happy for them?
- seanmcdirmid 9y ago
  I'm pretty sure no one who was making minimum wage got a $1000 bonus (including at Walmart, who would be making min wage after being there for 20 years? Sounds like a store manager or district sup to me). So I'm not happy for them because they don't exist.
  - rdtsc 9y ago
    AT&T claimed that it paid the bonus to 200k employees https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/20/tax-reform-reaction-att-is-giving-bonuses-to-200000-employees.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/20/tax-reform-reaction-att-is-g... They have a total of about 250k employees worldwide: https://www.att.com/Common/about_us/pdf/att_btn.pdf https://www.att.com/Common/about_us/pdf/att_btn.pdf. Pretty sure there 80% of their workforce are not district supervisors and store managers. Comcast said it paid the bonus to 100k employees "that are eligible and not in executive roles". > So I'm not happy for them because they don't exist. Good news, I think I found them!
    - seanmcdirmid 9y ago
      I’m pretty sure AT&T and Comcast don’t employ many min wage workers, especially not like Walmart does, if any at all. > Comcast said it paid the bonus to 100k employees "that are eligible and not in executive roles". But neither did they say they were making min wage. And then ... > Good news, I think I found them! You aren’t making a valid inference here, it honestly feels like something Trump would claim.

FireBeyond 9y ago

> a $1000 bonus For 20+ year employees. At 10 years the bonus was, IIRC, $190. IMHO, "laughable".

rdtsc 9y ago
Walmart is not the only company which did this. Other companies raised their minimum wages and also gave $1000 or $2500 bonuses (Apple did that too I think). Why not be happy for them they got something for the holidays. Sure we are all software developers expecting 6 figure salaries, RSUs, options and $50k bonuses every year, $1000 is nothing, I get it. Though someone working at an AT&T store in Columbus, OH or Kansas would be quite happy to get $1000. it's disappointing and I'd wish they all had large salaries and thought $1000 is insulting just like we do. In general we would rather have free healthcare, and other things we like to talk about here, but those probably are not going to happen in this country at his point in time. But why not be happy for these people at least or say that it is nice for Apple to pay some taxes and invest in US as opposed to stashing it away for another 20 years.

dguaraglia 9y ago

A $1000 bonus, after taxes, is not a $1000 bonus. While an extra ~$700 might be a nice windfall for someone making minimum wage, it's hardly a life-changing event that will have an durable impact in their life. What companies are doing is exactly what they were expected to do: make some "feel good" moves for a bit to validate the tax plan as a "resounding success" until the midterm elections, then do whatever they want. I've seen these incredible displays of "corporate goodwill" after tax breaks like this to know they are always temporary and self-serving (I grew up in a country where these "booms" happened like clockwork every 8 or so years.)

rkuykendall-com 9y ago

> $1000 bonus is not life changing but also not laughable. > The companies certainly didn't have to give those and could have pocketed all of it. Now imagine if the tax give-away would have gone completely to workers. That would be life changing.