> they are now laying off thousands and closing a few factories because they want to save $6B. This is the part that I'm saying isn't necessarily true. The fa

> they are now laying off thousands and closing a few factories because they want to save $6B. This is the part that I'm saying isn't necessarily true. The fact that they will save $6B by shutting down these factories doesn't imply that saving $6B was the reason they did it. If you're saying that the stock buyback demonstrates that they clearly had the money to keep these factories open, even in the absence of an economic case for doing so.... Well sure, but if we're talking about better contributions to global utility they could have made than the stock buyback, subsidizing unproductive factories is a horrible use of this money, compared to donating to homeless initiatives or malaria nets or any of a billion other things.