Corporate Profits

[Perry2016]

American corporations made a total of $1.6 trillion in profits in the last quarter of 2011 alone. To put this in perspective, those profits could have been used to create enough jobs to effectively end unemployment. I'm not saying they should give all of their profits away, but with so many struggling to find and maintain a good paying job or any at all, these "job creators" need to stop being so greedy and reinvest in the people of this country who buy their goods and services. Without the consumer, the corporation is nothing.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

American corporations made a total of $1.6 trillion in profits in the last quarter of 2011 alone. To put this in perspective, those profits could have been used to create enough jobs to effectively end unemployment. I'm not saying they should give all of their profits away, but with so many struggling to find and maintain a good paying job or any at all, these "job creators" need to stop being so greedy and reinvest in the people of this country who buy their goods and services. Without the consumer, the corporation is nothing.

too stupid!! why hire new people when you can make all you need with the people you have?? That would mean prices would go up, and we'd all pay more. Thats the opposite of what we need in a huge liberal depression like this one. You want to make us all poorer so we buy less and cause more unemployment??

 

[The Professor]

American corporations made a total of $1.6 trillion in profits in the last quarter of 2011 alone. To put this in perspective, those profits could have been used to create enough jobs to effectively end unemployment. I'm not saying they should give all of their profits away, but with so many struggling to find and maintain a good paying job or any at all, these "job creators" need to stop being so greedy and reinvest in the people of this country who buy their goods and services. Without the consumer, the corporation is nothing.

Dr. Trim Nerenz, Ph.D., Special Guest of the Maclver Institute wrote an article in which he explained how these huge profits are deceptive. He first revealed that these profits were reported by the fortune 500 which represents only .02% of American businesses. This does not mean that the other 98.08% are doing well. Dr. Nerenz adds:

“And finally, perhaps most importantly, 52% of the profits of the Fortune 500 in 2011 were earned overseas. When overseas profits are removed from corporate earnings reports, 2011 was a quite ordinary year in comparison to the previous 49.

“Jobs are being added by the Fortune 500; they are being added overseas. Corporate taxes are being reduced abroad, profits are being earned abroad and jobs are being created abroad; taken in their entirely, the facts contained in earnings reports of the Fortune 500 do not refute the supply-side theory of the tax-hawks, they support it.”

The rest of the article written by Dr. Nerenz can be read at the following link.

About Those Reports Regarding Record Profits... | MacIver Institute

Dr. Trim Nerenz, Ph.D., Special Guest of the Maclver Institute wrote an article in which he explained these huge profits are deceptive. He first revealed that these profits were reported by the fortune 500 which represents only .02% of American businesses. This does not mean that the other 98.08% are doing well. Dr. Nerenz adds:

“And finally, perhaps most importantly, 52% of the profits of the Fortune 500 in 2011 were earned overseas. When overseas profits are removed from corporate earnings reports, 2011 was a quite ordinary year in comparison to the previous 49.

“Jobs are being added by the Fortune 500; they are being added overseas. Corporate taxes are being reduced abroad, profits are being earned abroad and jobs are being created abroad; taken in their entirely, the facts contained in earnings reports of the Fortune 500 do not refute the supply-side theory of the tax-hawks, they support it.”

The rest of the article written by Dr. Nerenz can be read at the following link.

About Those Reports Regarding Record Profits... | MacIver Institute

The U.S. has created an anti-business environment and far too many people have jumped on the bandwagon. You say “without the consumer the corporation is nothing.” Perhaps you would like to return to an agrarian society and have everyone live off the land the way it was before a few industrialists accumulated enough wealth to open factories creating countless jobs and ending extreme poverty in this country. Yes, without consumers business fail; likewise, without prosperous businesses there are no jobs and no money. I doubt that you will admit - regardless of the amount of supporting evidence - that taxes and government regulations have a detrimental influence on corporate success. It really does appear that U.S owned businesses are doing much better in other countries - business-friendly countries - than they are here.

 

[Mr. H.]

Way to take the wind out of libtard sails.

 

[alan1]

American corporations made a total of $1.6 trillion in profits in the last quarter of 2011 alone. To put this in perspective, those profits could have been used to create enough jobs to effectively end unemployment. I'm not saying they should give all of their profits away, but with so many struggling to find and maintain a good paying job or any at all, these "job creators" need to stop being so greedy and reinvest in the people of this country who buy their goods and services. Without the consumer, the corporation is nothing.

One of the reasons I have a 401k and an IRA is so I can share in those corporate profits.
If you hurt the corporation (via taxes) then you hurt the vast majority of retired and working adults that own stock outright or via a 401k or IRA.

 

[Mad Scientist]

American corporations made a total of $1.6 trillion in profits in the last quarter of 2011 alone. To put this in perspective, those profits could have been used to create enough jobs to effectively end unemployment. I'm not saying they should give all of their profits away, but with so many struggling to find and maintain a good paying job or any at all, these "job creators" need to stop being so greedy and reinvest in the people of this country who buy their goods and services. Without the consumer, the corporation is nothing.

J.P. Morgan gets about 14 billion a year in Gov't subsidies. Talk about Corporate Welfare!

 

[expat_panama]

American corporations made a total of $1.6 trillion in profits in the last quarter of 2011 alone. To put this in perspective, those profits could have been used to create enough jobs...

You don't say where you got your $1.6T number, but the president's Bur. of Econ. Analysis data site has corps starting with $15.3T and getting it sliced up like this:

So it's workers that get most of that corporate income, although they first have to pay over $1.4T in taxes before they can feed their families. If you really care about workers, think about how much more money they'd have if they got to keep that $1.4T plus more that corps could pay them if they weren't being hit for $1.5T themselves.

Also, let me know if you have trouble with the BEA site and I'll show you where they keep their data.

 

[Mr. H.]

American corporations made a total of $1.6 trillion in profits in the last quarter of 2011 alone. To put this in perspective, those profits could have been used to create enough jobs to effectively end unemployment. I'm not saying they should give all of their profits away, but with so many struggling to find and maintain a good paying job or any at all, these "job creators" need to stop being so greedy and reinvest in the people of this country who buy their goods and services. Without the consumer, the corporation is nothing.

J.P. Morgan gets about 14 billion a year in Gov't subsidies. Talk about Corporate Welfare!

I'm curious what that's all about. Subsidies like mailbox money?

 

[emptystep]

I gave a thanks to both perry2016 and The Professor for point and counter-point. I agree with expat_panama that a source would have been useful.

One important concept to keep in mind is such discussions is the difference between net and gross. Companies can pay CEO's millions and still have no profit, i.e. non-profits, and companies can pay their CEO below industry average and make millions in profits.

Mr. H did not get a thumbs up because this is a troll comment and adds nothing to anything.

 

[alan1]

I gave a thanks to both perry2016 and The Professor for point and counter-point. I agree with expat_panama that a source would have been useful.

One important concept to keep in mind is such discussions is the difference between net and gross. Companies can pay CEO's millions and still have no profit, i.e. non-profits, and companies can pay their CEO below industry average and make millions in profits.

Mr. H did not get a thumbs up because this is a troll comment and adds nothing to anything.

I like being chopped liver.

 

[emptystep]

I gave a thanks to both perry2016 and The Professor for point and counter-point. I agree with expat_panama that a source would have been useful.

One important concept to keep in mind is such discussions is the difference between net and gross. Companies can pay CEO's millions and still have no profit, i.e. non-profits, and companies can pay their CEO below industry average and make millions in profits.

Mr. H did not get a thumbs up because this is a troll comment and adds nothing to anything.

I like being chopped liver.

I was, er, typing it up.

The correlation between 'profits' and 401k value is indirect and complex as 401k value is actually stock market value of shares held in the 401k, or IRA. Presumably good profits will raise stock price but there is no one-to-one correlation.

(Let's see if Mad Scientist feels like a food group.)

 

[expat_panama]

...One important concept to keep in mind is such discussions is the difference between net and gross...

For America the important thing is that voters have decided corporate profits are bad--

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07fTsF5BiSM&feature=player_embedded]Democrats: Let's Ban Profits! - YouTube[/ame]

-- and this is destroying the nation.

We all need to think. Virtually all payroll employees are hired by corporations. When corporations with more profits they have more employees. Democrats took over and have fought to destroy corporate profits. Since the '08 election employment's dropped by 1,740,000 even while the US population grew by 8,281,000.

...Companies can pay CEO's millions and still have no profit, i.e. non-profits, and companies can pay their CEO below industry average and make millions in profits...

Let's think again. A good CEO will both increase profits and be able to demand a high salary. A bad CEO will make the company lose money and will get fired.

 

[Mad Scientist]

I gave a thanks to both perry2016 and The Professor for point and counter-point. I agree with expat_panama that a source would have been useful.

One important concept to keep in mind is such discussions is the difference between net and gross. Companies can pay CEO's millions and still have no profit, i.e. non-profits, and companies can pay their CEO below industry average and make millions in profits.

Mr. H did not get a thumbs up because this is a troll comment and adds nothing to anything.

I like being chopped liver.

I was, er, typing it up.

The correlation between 'profits' and 401k value is indirect and complex as 401k value is actually stock market value of shares held in the 401k, or IRA. Presumably good profits will raise stock price but there is no one-to-one correlation.

(Let's see if Mad Scientist feels like a food group.)

I'm not against Corporations making profit. I AM against Corporations getting Federal Handouts.
Dear Mr. Dimon, Is Your Bank Getting Corporate Welfare? - Bloomberg

JPMorgan receives a government subsidy worth about $14 billion a year, according to research published by the International Monetary Fund and our own analysis of bank balance sheets. The money helps the bank pay big salaries and bonuses. More important, it distorts markets, fueling crises such as the recent subprime-lending disaster and the sovereign-debt debacle that is now threatening to destroy the euro and sink the global economy.

 

[expat_panama]

...I AM against Corporations getting Federal Handouts.
Dear Mr. Dimon, Is Your Bank Getting Corporate Welfare? - Bloomberg

JPMorgan receives a government subsidy worth about $14 billion a year, according to research published by the International Monetary Fund and our own analysis...

I'm against people making up goofy stories about subsidies that aren't. According to the World Bank and my own analysis, members on this forum are being paid $15 billion to fabricate phony subsidy posts.

Seriously, made up stories about corporate handouts is easy. What's not easy is paying taxes to cover real life welfare (from OMB Whitehouse.gov)--

Table 3.1—OUTLAYS BY FUNCTION: 2011

Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services $101,233,000,000
Health $372,500,000,000
Medicare $485,653,000,000
Income Security $597,352,000,000
Social Security $730,811,000,000

Total $2,287,549,000,000​

​

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Also, lets not forget that many banks went bankrupt and the biggest survivors like BOA and Citbank are now in dire straights. The free market taught them a huge lesson they won't soon forget.

But, with Barry constantly talking about how he successfully bailed out GM and the banks, and his socialist take over of the health industry its hard to imagine the fascist crony capitalism won't continue as long as he is occupying the White House