3 ms·

I hope one day we realize businesses tend to care more about increasing profits than increasing jobs...and that sometimes the easiest way to increase profits is

I hope one day we realize businesses tend to care more about increasing profits than increasing jobs...and that sometimes the easiest way to increase profits is to decrease jobs. I think we in society really need to evaluate this...maybe instead of forcing companies to create jobs, we can think of another way for humans to have money. Some humans make money not from working a job but from ownership, getting dividends from that. What if we could change the way we do or view ownership and people get dividends from that? Haha, maybe I'm just reinventing the stock market, but not all stocks give dividends. Maybe instead of asking companies to create jobs, we should ask them to give more dividends? I'm curious to hear your thoughts to this dilemma of us asking conpanies to create jobs and how that might make them less efficient.

citizenpaul 3y ago
>ask them to give more dividends? One of the biggest reasons for layoffs is investor pressure to increase shareholder value. You basically already have to be rich(maybe not HN rich) for dividends to have any real difference in your life. You have to be fantastically rich for your dividend ownership to have any influence on the company.
- jimkleiber 3y ago
  At the current level and concept of dividends, yes. I guess I was just thinking more broadly on the idea of profit sharing, maybe it involves changing the way we look at ownership. Alaska has a permanent fund that receives money I think from oil and pays each if its citizens a part of that money. In my view, that's as if each Alaskan citizen "owns" a part of the oil industry there and received profit sharing. I think something similar might happen in the UAE. So I'm curious what a different concept of dividend/profit sharing might look like where it can help those who aren't the medium or super rich.
  - nateglims 3y ago
    Companies used to sometimes offer direct profit sharing. Stocks became a preferable vehicle over time. For an alternative model, worker coops would be the most straight forward.
rawgabbit 3y ago
There have been many studies to determine the return on investment when governments subsidize private companies. AFAIK the time the ROI was positive was when the subsidy enabled trade to an “outside” partner that would not have happened otherwise. Think international airport or shipping port that created a new trade route. Of course if that trade route already exists in a different form, then you are throwing away money.
akira2501 3y ago
You're attempting to mix social policy and business goals. I don't believe they should be mixed. It's not incumbent on business owners to blindly increase the number of jobs they have, and if you encourage them to do so, you're just allowing one company to monopolize the labor market, which has incredibly negative effects. What I worry about is how to increase the number of small businesses and the number of people working for themselves.

citizenpaul 3y ago

>ask them to give more dividends? One of the biggest reasons for layoffs is investor pressure to increase shareholder value. You basically already have to be rich(maybe not HN rich) for dividends to have any real difference in your life. You have to be fantastically rich for your dividend ownership to have any influence on the company.

jimkleiber 3y ago
At the current level and concept of dividends, yes. I guess I was just thinking more broadly on the idea of profit sharing, maybe it involves changing the way we look at ownership. Alaska has a permanent fund that receives money I think from oil and pays each if its citizens a part of that money. In my view, that's as if each Alaskan citizen "owns" a part of the oil industry there and received profit sharing. I think something similar might happen in the UAE. So I'm curious what a different concept of dividend/profit sharing might look like where it can help those who aren't the medium or super rich.
- nateglims 3y ago
  Companies used to sometimes offer direct profit sharing. Stocks became a preferable vehicle over time. For an alternative model, worker coops would be the most straight forward.

rawgabbit 3y ago

There have been many studies to determine the return on investment when governments subsidize private companies. AFAIK the time the ROI was positive was when the subsidy enabled trade to an “outside” partner that would not have happened otherwise. Think international airport or shipping port that created a new trade route. Of course if that trade route already exists in a different form, then you are throwing away money.

akira2501 3y ago

You're attempting to mix social policy and business goals. I don't believe they should be mixed. It's not incumbent on business owners to blindly increase the number of jobs they have, and if you encourage them to do so, you're just allowing one company to monopolize the labor market, which has incredibly negative effects. What I worry about is how to increase the number of small businesses and the number of people working for themselves.