Companies will invest in employees with the tax cuts

UW_Doog_Bot said:

greenblood said:

Unemployment is never getting much below 3%. These 3% of Americans are unemployable.

Who gives a fuck if these companies buy back stock? It’s their money. This brings us back to the 3%. If 3% of Americans can’t even hold a broom, how can these companies invest in bigger workforces? What else are they going to spend their money on? Before you say, they should raise wages let me ask you this. Why would companies raise wages if competitors aren’t? Unless they can take quality workers from other conpanies, higher wages provide nothing for the company.

It's not that 3% are unemployable it's that 3% is essentially "structural" unemployment and we are considered at "full employment". Of course we add fewer jobs when we are essentially at full employment. What's been amazing about Trump is the number of people who weren't counted(under Obama) that have returned to the workforce though.

"noun: structural unemployment
unemployment resulting from industrial reorganization, typically due to technological change, rather than fluctuations in supply or demand."

2001400ex said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

greenblood said:

Unemployment is never getting much below 3%. These 3% of Americans are unemployable.

Who gives a fuck if these companies buy back stock? It’s their money. This brings us back to the 3%. If 3% of Americans can’t even hold a broom, how can these companies invest in bigger workforces? What else are they going to spend their money on? Before you say, they should raise wages let me ask you this. Why would companies raise wages if competitors aren’t? Unless they can take quality workers from other conpanies, higher wages provide nothing for the company.

It's not that 3% are unemployable it's that 3% is essentially "structural" unemployment and we are considered at "full employment". Of course we add fewer jobs when we are essentially at full employment. What's been amazing about Trump is the number of people who weren't counted(under Obama) that have returned to the workforce though.

"noun: structural unemployment
unemployment resulting from industrial reorganization, typically due to technological change, rather than fluctuations in supply or demand."

Wut? Labor force participation hasn't changed.

2001400ex said:

PurpleThrobber said:

2001400ex said:

Also, fun fact of the day. Employment grew more the last 21 months of Obama than the first 21 months of Trump.

It is the first time Berkshire has bought back stock since 2012. The decision, announced in a quarterly filing Saturday, illustrates the scarcity of attractively priced projects and deals that can satiate yield-hungry investors and firms more than nine years into a bull market.

A legendary value investor best known for striking deals when prices are low, Mr. Buffett has struggled to find large investments that aren’t overvalued. Berkshire hasn’t made a major acquisition since it bought Precision Castparts Corp. for about $32 billion in 2016.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-repurchases-more-than-900-million-of-stock-1541248428

It's Trump's fault Warren didn't buy low/sell high?!?!

Also seems to me that a stock buyback is good for the shareholders and raises the value of their shares instead of the company sitting on a boatload of cash.

You are completely missing the boat on the point of the thread. As is every other conservative here.

On tax cuts, Republicans said: will increase job as companies will use the money to invest in businesses and employ people.

Democrats said: businesses are already flush with cash. All they will do is buy back stock, which enriches the wealthy and does very little for the middle class.

Guess who was right?

Not to mention that job growth is slower the last 21 months than the last 21 months of Obama. What does that fact mean?