4 ms·

It seems it'd be a net benefit to make most share buyback programmes illegal; or increase the taxes on them dramatically. If frequent and at scale, they just se

It seems it'd be a net benefit to make most share buyback programmes illegal; or increase the taxes on them dramatically. If frequent and at scale, they just seem to be prima fasce evidence of a market failure.

toomuchtodo 3y ago
Stock buybacks used to be illegal. > “Prior to 1982, stock buybacks were considered illegal stock manipulation, but President Reagan's Securities and Exchange Commission implemented a rule to exempt them. http://chuygarcia.house.gov/media/press-releases/representatives-garcia-hoyle-and-khanna-reintroduce-legislation-to-ban-stock-buybacks http://chuygarcia.house.gov/media/press-releases/representat...
- awithrow 3y ago
  Posting a politicians platform on stock isn't exactly a good argument. It doesn't explain why they should be considered market manipulation. Why is buying back a share manipulation but a dividend not be? Should issuing dividends be illegal since "worker pay hasn't kept up"?
  - rimunroe 3y ago
    > Posting a politicians platform on stock isn't exactly a good argument. It doesn't explain why they should be considered market manipulation. Why is buying back a share manipulation but a dividend not be? Should issuing dividends be illegal since "worker pay hasn't kept up"? I didn't take that as toomuchtodo trying to make an argument personally. toomuchtodo pointed out that they were illegal in the past, and shared a statement from a politician who wants to outlaw them again. Both of these are direct responses to mjburgess. That stock buybacks were illegal in the past is a relevant factual statement, as is a politician having a platform (seemingly) aligned with the wishes of mjburgess.
    - toomuchtodo 3y ago
      This. First google result for “illegal stock buybacks.” Can’t wait for GPTs to replace this need (citation for assertion), as first page Google results aren’t great (insert elaine benice i hate it meme here).
    - awithrow 3y ago
      Sure, but why does something being illegal in the past matter without the reasoning of why it should be illegal again? There are plenty of immoral and unjust laws in the past.
      - rimunroe 3y ago
        > Sure, but why does something being illegal in the past matter without the reasoning of why it should be illegal again? It's an interesting tidbit and gives a jumping off point for the person who was asking about it to research further if they want. I wouldn't have guessed that they were illegal once, but after toomuchtodo's comment I looked it up. Now I know more! One shouldn't assume that just because someone chimed in with a fun fact they're an expert on it or have some opinion they want to push for unless they said or implied otherwise, which toomuchtodo didn't do. As an example: I have minimal interest in anything related to stocks or finance. My only interest here was your response seeming a bit out of place :)
      - toomuchtodo 3y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#Chesterton's_fence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#Chesterton's_...
- forgotmyinfo 3y ago
  [flagged]
- transcriptase 3y ago
  A company acting to make money for the people who own it. What a novel concept.
  - toomuchtodo 3y ago
    Rules and laws can change at any time, especially if they’re not encouraging the desired outcome. It’s all a shared delusion on a spreadsheet, not immutable laws of physics. Companies exist because they are allowed to.
    - transcriptase 3y ago
      The same is true of governments.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]

toomuchtodo 3y ago

Stock buybacks used to be illegal. > “Prior to 1982, stock buybacks were considered illegal stock manipulation, but President Reagan's Securities and Exchange Commission implemented a rule to exempt them. http://chuygarcia.house.gov/media/press-releases/representatives-garcia-hoyle-and-khanna-reintroduce-legislation-to-ban-stock-buybacks http://chuygarcia.house.gov/media/press-releases/representat...

awithrow 3y ago
Posting a politicians platform on stock isn't exactly a good argument. It doesn't explain why they should be considered market manipulation. Why is buying back a share manipulation but a dividend not be? Should issuing dividends be illegal since "worker pay hasn't kept up"?
- rimunroe 3y ago
  > Posting a politicians platform on stock isn't exactly a good argument. It doesn't explain why they should be considered market manipulation. Why is buying back a share manipulation but a dividend not be? Should issuing dividends be illegal since "worker pay hasn't kept up"? I didn't take that as toomuchtodo trying to make an argument personally. toomuchtodo pointed out that they were illegal in the past, and shared a statement from a politician who wants to outlaw them again. Both of these are direct responses to mjburgess. That stock buybacks were illegal in the past is a relevant factual statement, as is a politician having a platform (seemingly) aligned with the wishes of mjburgess.
  - toomuchtodo 3y ago
    This. First google result for “illegal stock buybacks.” Can’t wait for GPTs to replace this need (citation for assertion), as first page Google results aren’t great (insert elaine benice i hate it meme here).
  - awithrow 3y ago
    Sure, but why does something being illegal in the past matter without the reasoning of why it should be illegal again? There are plenty of immoral and unjust laws in the past.
    - rimunroe 3y ago
      > Sure, but why does something being illegal in the past matter without the reasoning of why it should be illegal again? It's an interesting tidbit and gives a jumping off point for the person who was asking about it to research further if they want. I wouldn't have guessed that they were illegal once, but after toomuchtodo's comment I looked it up. Now I know more! One shouldn't assume that just because someone chimed in with a fun fact they're an expert on it or have some opinion they want to push for unless they said or implied otherwise, which toomuchtodo didn't do. As an example: I have minimal interest in anything related to stocks or finance. My only interest here was your response seeming a bit out of place :)
    - toomuchtodo 3y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#Chesterton's_fence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#Chesterton's_...
forgotmyinfo 3y ago
[flagged]
transcriptase 3y ago
A company acting to make money for the people who own it. What a novel concept.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  Rules and laws can change at any time, especially if they’re not encouraging the desired outcome. It’s all a shared delusion on a spreadsheet, not immutable laws of physics. Companies exist because they are allowed to.
  - transcriptase 3y ago
    The same is true of governments.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]