http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/24/business/economy/24econ.html
American Companies posted an astounting 1.6+ TRILLION dollars on profits last quarter. Yet job growth remains slow.
I wonder what does this does to the supply side argument that giving more money to business's (and the rich) will somwhow result in job and economic growth?? It does not seem to be happening that way...does it?
I wonder if people stop to think that tax rates were higher during the Clinton years, yet the economy in 1992-2000 was far better than now.
I wonder when people will begin to understand that consumer spending (not spending by corporations) is the main driving force behind the American economy, and if those consumers wages are reduced or eliminated, buying power is reduced, and the economy suffers.
I wonder when American's will stop to consider how many millions of good paying jobs have been shipped to China in the last 30 years, and how much American buying power and tax revenue has been lost.
I wonder if they'll ever learn...😕
Originally posted by bill718Great Jerry Seinfeld impression!
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/24/business/economy/24econ.html
American Companies posted an astounting 1.6+ TRILLION dollars on profits last quarter. Yet job growth remains slow.
I wonder what does this does to the supply side argument that giving more money to business's (and the rich) will somwhow result in job and economic growth?? It does not seem ...[text shortened]... American buying power and tax revenue has been lost.
I wonder if they'll ever learn...😕
GRANNY.
Originally posted by bill718Hmm. The US GDP is around 14 trillion. That is an average of 3.5 trillion per quarter.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/24/business/economy/24econ.html
American Companies posted an astounting 1.6+ TRILLION dollars on profits last quarter. Yet job growth remains slow.
I wonder what does this does to the supply side argument that giving more money to business's (and the rich) will somwhow result in job and economic growth?? It does not seem ...[text shortened]... American buying power and tax revenue has been lost.
I wonder if they'll ever learn...😕
You're saying that corporate profits were 45% of the entire GDP. (Note: a significant amount of the GDP is generated through individuals that are not corporations).
Normally, it would be considered excellent for a company if 3% of it's total revenue is profit.
Sorry, I didn't read the article. But if corporations make 1.6 trillion in revenue and have 1.57 trillion in expenses, I wouldn't find that astounding. I seriously doubt we're really talking 1.6 trillion in profits.
Originally posted by techsouthReading the article might have helped. The $1.659 trillion figure was an annual rate. That figure represents 11.2% of GDP.
Hmm. The US GDP is around 14 trillion. That is an average of 3.5 trillion per quarter.
You're saying that corporate profits were 45% of the entire GDP. (Note: a significant amount of the GDP is generated through individuals that are not corporations).
Normally, it would be considered excellent for a company if 3% of it's total revenue is profit. ...[text shortened]... dn't find that astounding. I seriously doubt we're really talking 1.6 trillion in profits.
I wonder if the Wells Fargo or the Bank of America would burn more dramatically?
Oh, no wait - I really loathe Citibank.
*************
if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had done this, they would sooner or later realize that the privileged minority had no function, and they would sweep it away. In the long run, a hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance.
1984 by George Orwell
http://www.exponentialimprovement.com/cms/goldstein.shtml
Originally posted by bill718Well, that would be the desirable situation. The reality, however, is that there are many middle-men, especially in large corporations. The more people a middle manager can manage, generally the more he gets paid. This is why large corporations (and indeed government institutions) tend to be bloated and bureaucratic. During an economic boom, the middle managers can easily convince the higher management to hire more people, even if they are not needed. During a downturn, the higher management wants to fire people, and in those cases they tend to fire the useful employees as well. Not much you can do about it.
You're 95% correct, the fact is Corporations will hire people ONLY if they think it will get them bigger profits.
Originally posted by AThousandYoung...a lot of truth in Mr. Orwell's statement.
I wonder if the Wells Fargo or the Bank of America would burn more dramatically?
Oh, no wait - I really loathe Citibank.
*************
if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had ...[text shortened]... norance.
1984 by George Orwell
http://www.exponentialimprovement.com/cms/goldstein.shtml