|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: American Budget Cuts | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
Why would anyone buy those shares if those shares do not receive a dividend? Many companys do not pay a dividend to stock holders. Some people wise in the market feel dividends are not a good financial move by companies.
quote:404 Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1498 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Why would anyone buy those shares if those shares do not receive a dividend? For resale.
Why would anyone ever buy a share that does not compensate for the risk inherent in that share? Because they're gambling, like most stock market activity.
I know you don't see the difference, and that is what I'm complaining about. Maybe you could complain about it by articulating a difference.
Who in their right mind would exchange an essentially risk-free dollar for a dollar share of some company, with no compensation for the risk? A gambler, i.e. most participants in the stock market.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
Nice hypothetical, based on the argument from consequences and made up numbers. Why don't you make it 50,000 jobs? You're right. A little more research indicates that my number was off by almost 4 times. Not 50,000 jobs, RAZD, but more like 150,000 to 200,000 jobs depending on location. Amazing what $8 billion will do for employment in a region. But remember your talking not one place but 40 times that. So your talking about throwing millions of Americans out of work.
According to Representative Boehner, if the cuts necessary to balance the budget result in some job losses, then "so be it" Hey, Mr. Logical Fallacy, what's with this strawman Republican BS? I'm not talking about some stupid, insensitive Republican's plans to cut thousands from the public payroll. I'm talking about your proposal to throw millions of people out of their private sector jobs. I don't give a flyin' flip what some bozo Republican has to say about much of anything and I suspect neither do you. Keep with the theme here, RAZD
In addition, money spent on military budget is essentially just make-work welfare rather than jobs that provide a return to the society. Are you really so ignorant of economics, RAZD? You think that when GD makes an Abrams tank or Lockheed an F-35 these things just sit out in their parking lot rusting away? Like any other manufacturer of any other product they SELL them, RAZD. They sell them for a pretty good profit at that. That pays wages, increases shareholder value, retained earnings, taxes into the local school, all the usual good stuff that does indeed feed right back into the economy. You have a pension fund? Maybe a mutual fund? If so, RAZD, you financially benefit everyday from these private sector enterprises. "Make-work welfare rather that jobs"? My ass. Pull your head out of it RAZD. But this isn't about economics or budgets, is it RAZD.
Every piece of high end military armament made is a dead-end product designed to kill people ... You have an agenda. The guns-v-butter thing. I'll not argue that one here, but it does tie nicely into your Republican strawman.
Boehner writes: If some of those jobs are lost, so be it." RAZD writes: That to me is a small loss in this world of overburdened military expenditures. There you have it, RAZD. You share a strident, callous, insensitivity for your fellow citizens with the Republicans. Willfully blind to the suffering you propose for the sake of your political agenda. Throw families into financial peril. Throw children into near poverty. What is it with you political idiots? These aren't real people to you? They're just so much flotsam in the way of your goal? Whether it's from the right or from the left it's always the same isn't it?Fuck the millions of people. Fuck the millions of children. As long as the agenda is moving forward FUCK THEM ALL! Your proposal sucks, RAZD. And just like Boehner's, so does your politics.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
Why would anyone buy those shares if those shares do not receive a dividend? What do you think drives the capital appreciation of those shares? Why would anyone ever buy a share that does not compensate for the risk inherent in that share? You didn't ask for the motivation for trading the shares.
I know you don't see the difference, and that is what I'm complaining about. You and Crash and Rrhain the other week have very little clue about all of this and yet let rip with emotional and hyperbolic rhetoric. It's no wonder the right find such behaviour hilarious. Then what is the difference? Please explain. What I see is the people in charge of watching the corporate cookie jar are helping themselves to the cookies. With some of the moves towards privatization we see massive profiteering, such as the deregulation of energy in the hands of Enron. The practices that health insurance companies have been allowed to get away with has been scandalous. The gap between the rich and the middle class continues to widen while expenses (e.g. health care and education) continue to rise for the middle class.
And in fact, I totally agree with you regarding the stupid levels of board level compensation. Actually, it's not the level that I disagree with the most but the no-downside reward structure that is in place. Same with trading remuneration in the banks. I was writing and advising on this very issue 11 years ago on the back of the emerging market crisis... and nothing has changed. I am glad we agree on this part. That is what I was originally complaining about with regard to defense budgets and health care.
By personal use, do you mean the use made of it by the pension funds? This would apply more to privately owned companies than publically owned. This is where the owner takes out a chunk of money out of the companies coffers and puts it in his/her own coffers.
And back to my first point. Should shares not pay dividends? Who in their right mind would exchange an essentially risk-free dollar for a dollar share of some company, with no compensation for the risk? Just so we understand that money is going out of the company for things not related to production or improvement of product. That was all I was pointing out.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3674 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
Why would anyone buy those shares if those shares do not receive a dividend? For resale. I'm sorry but this is painful. Sell it for what?
Because they're gambling, like most stock market activity. What do you think drives the fluctuations in the stock market? And no, most stock market activity is not "gambling". The ignorance here is staggering.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3674 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
Many companys do not pay a dividend to stock holders. Some people wise in the market feel dividends are not a good financial move by companies. Sometimes true. But before you're ready to understand why this works, you have to understand the purpose behind the dividend. And you have to understand the nature of the companies not paying dividends. Paying a dividend will not always be the smart move. But this very much depends on the particular circumstances. Ever heard of the dot com boom? How much dividend payout was there as those shares climbed to extraordinary levels? How much cash was made by those clever enough to understand. And how much more was lost by those that think that not paying a dividend is a sign of good thing?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3674 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
Whether it's from the right or from the left it's always the same isn't it? Fuck the millions of people. Fuck the millions of children. As long as the agenda is moving forward FUCK THEM ALL! Funny, I was thinking exactly the same thing earlier today. For supposed critical thinkers, it's amazing how much ideology will dominate ones thinking. What's so stupid is that there are good arguments that can be made, but they are lost beneath the noise and bluster of naive hyperbole.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
And no, most stock market activity is not "gambling". Sure it is. Every time you buy a stock you are taking a calculated risk that it will go up in value. I don't see how it can be anything else but a gamble. If it wasn't a gamble there would be a guarantee on the investment. The stock market works on the fact some stocks go up and some go down. If all stocks went up there would be no stock market. The ignorance here is staggering. You really need a basic economics class and a class on how all financial markets function. Ever hear of the commodities markets? Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
What's so stupid is that there are good arguments that can be made, but they are lost beneath the noise and bluster of naive hyperbole. Yeah, well, I have the flu and I'm being emotional and intolerant of all things right now.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3674 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
The ignorance here is staggering. You really need a basic economics class and a class on how all financial markets function. Yeah, perhaps I ought go trade derivatives for some time in what was the world's leading derivative house. Or maybe publish the first analysis of shareholder value growth of the FTSE-100, tracking every fucking company through every fucking rights- and scrip-issue. Or maybe help set in place the risk mechanisms in Barclays Capital that meant that over a decade later it was one of the only major financial institutions in the Uk not to require a bail-out.... Oh, wait
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
xongsmith Member Posts: 2587 From: massachusetts US Joined: Member Rating: 7.0 |
cavediver a while back here said writes: ......can you think of ways in which this would lead to growth of the company, hence enabling it to capitalise on economies of scale, hence further improving efficiency? I've been thinking about The Economy Of Scale for awhile, and originally was thinking it was a terrible, terrible thing to inflict upon humans. The mom & pop stores cannot compete with the megacorporations because of this. If nature had just been different here, we'd still have our warm neighborhood centers. But now I am also have thinking that it is a clever way for megacorporations to shove the cost of business onto the general consumer in the form of hidden costs. The very process of harvesting millions of acres of corn at once, for example, cannot be seen immediately. Everybody is buying the cheap corn. But what are the environmental costs that someday down the road the average dude on the street is going to have to pay for? Take the fast food's reluctance to convert over to eco-friendly wrappings. Here was a blatant "not our problem - it's up to you to pay to clean up that shit" way of saving oodles of cash. Just packaging in general - it's all cost passed on to the consumer in more ways than the price of the item. The landfills getting filled will eventually be an enormous cost. I'm thinking it might turn out that the more you use economy of scale, the more you are creating a bigger problem later on down the road. Sort of a principle of conservation of total inefficiency across the whole system. Food for thought. In other words, economy of scale might improve local efficiency, but the system as a whole is more inefficient.... - xongsmith, 5.7d
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3674 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
In other words, economy of scale might improve local efficiency, but the system as a whole is more inefficient.... Yep, agree with all that you say. The out-of-sight out-of-mind intangibles are rarely valued correctly, if at all. The trouble is, no matter how you package it, the average Westerner wants cheap shit, period. I've carried out far too many focus groups and in many different markets, and this is the one consistent output.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
No response that buying stocks is ultimately a gamble? Nothing to say on that?
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3674 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
No response that buying stocks is ultimately a gamble? Nothing to say on that? Err, yes. Given that you quoted me, I would have thought you might have noticed...
cd writes: And no, most stock market activity is not "gambling". As to why... well, I guess I'll have to wait till the end of my basic economics class and hopefully by then I'll know.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1498 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Sell it for what? For money, stupid. What else?
What do you think drives the fluctuations in the stock market? Perceptions of the value of owning shares in various companies.
And no, most stock market activity is not "gambling". Yes, it is. In any stock market, somebody is selling and somebody is buying. The sellers are selling to the buyers. Since trading stocks doesn't create value, trading stocks is a zero-sum game. If a given stock transaction would wind up making you money (say, you sell the stock for $10 more than you paid for it), then someone else must have lost the exact same amount of money. So, in net, there's no money to be made on the stock market - only money to be passed around. The gamble is that you'll be one of the winners instead of the losers, but the available evidence is that there's no reliable heuristic to guarantee this. Of course almost all activity on the stock market is a gamble. How could you have worked on the stock market and not have realized this?
The ignorance here is staggering. Yeah, I know. You didn't even know that the stock market is gambling!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024