What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Business, Economics, and Taxes: Capitalism. Yay? >=(

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kepler said:
If you're an officer of a publicly traded company you can be prosecuted for pursuing any other goal than maximizing profits.
Click to expand...

Which is utter horseshiat that's only been applied since the 1980's. Previously, companies recognized 4 constituencies they had to serve; their owners, their employees, their customers, and their community. It was only once the MBAs settled on a theory that owners' interests come before all that we wound up in the current situation.

Frankly, legally, they probably could serve the others' and justify doing so. The problem is the shareholders have the money to take them to court to fight business decisions to the contrary, so officers will still bow down to them out of self-preservation. The risk-reward simply isn't worth it to try anything else.
 
It would seem that I will have to file an amended tax return due to the unemployment waiver. Not a super big deal and worth it since it should wipe out what I owe the state and add money to my return. (which they already paid since I filed so quickly)
 
Handyman said:
It would seem that I will have to file an amended tax return due to the unemployment waiver. Not a super big deal and worth it since it should wipe out what I owe the state and add money to my return. (which they already paid since I filed so quickly)
Click to expand...

Oh, is the first $10,200 for unemployment non-taxable for this year’s taxes? I haven’t filed yet to wait and see how this bill shook it all out.
 
Kepler said:
If you're an officer of a publicly traded company you can be prosecuted for pursuing any other goal than maximizing profits.
Click to expand...

this is why, for example, I'd rather buy clothes from Patagonia than most other large clothing companies. They're incorporated as a Benefit Corporation and have a "legally binding fiduciary responsibility to take into account the interests of workers, the community and the environment as well as its shareholders" (in the case of Patagonia, I believe the shareholders are a family trust. They're not public.). I think around 20 states allow an arrangement like this, which has more legal safeguards than a voluntary "B-Corp" certification (which Patagonia also has).

This is a better form of capitalism, but it requires smaller privately held companies for us to support rather than the large public companies.
 
unofan said:
Which is utter horseshiat that's only been applied since the 1980's. Previously, companies recognized 4 constituencies they had to serve; their owners, their employees, their customers, and their community. It was only once the MBAs settled on a theory that owners' interests come before all that we wound up in the current situation.
Click to expand...

I did not realize this. Is there a specific case where the rot set in?
 
psych said:
Oh, is the first $10,200 for unemployment non-taxable for this year’s taxes? I haven’t filed yet to wait and see how this bill shook it all out.
Click to expand...

Yes the unemployment had to be from 2020 and is non-taxable on this years taxes.
 
Handyman said:
It would seem that I will have to file an amended tax return due to the unemployment waiver. Not a super big deal and worth it since it should wipe out what I owe the state and add money to my return. (which they already paid since I filed so quickly)
Click to expand...

I somehow came out only owing a few hundred on taxes...no idea how but I’ll take it. Feds owe me and I owe Minnesota which isn’t unusual
 
reditters discovered the Dian Fosse Center was running an adopt-a-gorilla.

GME went from 80 to 250 last week and wsb people got rich.

And so, we now have stuff like this.

k8ouabei9ym61.jpg
 
Elections have consequences.

The Federal Reserve said it was ending a yearlong reprieve that had eased capital requirements for big banks, disappointing Wall Street firms that had lobbied for an extension.

Friday’s decision means banks will lose the temporary ability to exclude Treasurys and deposits held at the central bank from lenders’ so-called supplementary leverage ratio. The ratio measures capital—funds that banks raise from investors, earn through profits and use to absorb losses—as a percentage of loans and other assets. Without the exclusion, Treasurys and deposits count as assets. That will likely force banks to hold more capital or reduce their holdings of those assets, both of which could ripple through markets.
Click to expand...
 
aparch said:
I think I get it, but can someone give me the "Explain-Like-I'm-5" explanation? Because this sounds like some of the fluidity we've seen in the markets may dry up if banks need to keep more cash on hand.
Click to expand...

My entire understanding of the article consists in the dictionary definitions of the term in the article. I'm sure we have others here with financial experience (dx?) who will know far more.
 
St clown?

This stuff flies a bit above my head. I understand they're basically changing what counts a "liquid" assets. I don't understand the impact to the market without reading more. Probably a lot of "ooga booga scary! Me want less regulations" nonsense.

edit, the more I read, the less I think I was even close.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top