Live data from Hacker News

Why Are Corporations Hoarding Trillions?

nytimes.com

81–90 of 412 posts

Re: Why Are Corporations Hoarding Trillions?

#81
post #2

It's the same reason I save my money: for opportunities when prices are low. This is especially relevant now that the stock market is tanking. Most people with any kind of money think this way.

> It's the same reason I save my money: for opportunities when prices are low The problem is: how do you know if the time is right (i.e. ten years later you can say "I invested in the lowest possible price")? Possibility A: you invest too early, stock drops further and you can't recover in a reasonably long time frame (e.g. 1 year) Possibility B: you invest too late, and people who invested before you made more profi…

Who cares if the investment doesn't maximize potential profit? If someone invests $50 and gets $100 in return, that's great. If someone else invests $50 and gets $99.42 in return, that's great too, and who cares if someone made more 'profit' from buying and holding an imaginary financial instrument? The point is: buy "lower", sell "higher" is close enough to buy at the lowest point and sell at the highest point. But other factors come into play on why someone would sell at any time. Theoretically, ceteris paribus mutatis mutandis, if you invest in some company that happens to survive a thousand years into the future and has an annual average ROR of 7%, you should never sell it, even after your death if you want to maximize profit...buy low-ish, sell high-ish as convenient and with common sense. Theoretical perfectly maximized trades should not be the concern of the investor. Count dollars instead of pennies.

The problem you refer to is formally known as "Risk" aka Risk Capital.

Re: Why Are Corporations Hoarding Trillions?

#82
post #57
post #14

This article does a good job of explaining: http://www.dailyfinance.com/on/corporations-cash-hoard-trill... Some interesting excerpts: "Four of the top five holders of cash are tech companies ...who together possess...about 23 percent of all cash owned by corporate America today. Overall, the tech sector controls more than half of such cash" "about 60 percent of [non-financial corporate] cash piles are offshore and s…

The simple answer is that these companies have leveraged the immense economies of scale in their info-tech niches, and are soaking up billions of consumers' money but there's nothing else for them to buy. This is the sort of purchasing power imbalance that caused the Great Depression. The good news is that even if Depression hits, we still have access to web apps.

Another viewpoint might be that if the economy is indeed in for a slow or down period (which is certainly not a guarantee at this point), they will be better equipped to weather the storm and seize opportunities that arise (ex: acquiring competitors who could not survive).

Personally I'd love to see them throw around that cash to bring serious competition to a few specific markets. Cell phones and cable are the big ones (and Google is already getting started there). Looks like they are plans to do similar things with VR, robotics, and automated vehicles.

Re: Why Are Corporations Hoarding Trillions?

#83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> The current US debt is over 18.900.000.000.000 Am I getting the author right that the US managed to put on 18 B $ in 20 years?! Google image search: https://www.google.com/search?q=US+debt&biw=1217&bih=755&sou... Check this one: http://wolfstreet.com/2014/12/02/us-national-debt-jumps-181-... So not quite, but at the end of Clinton there was a small surplus. Bush looked at that surplus and said the following: 1) Th…

#4 was really "tax breaks for the rich". The check everyone else got was just an early chunk of their normal refund check. Surpluses are a big problem to the "starve the beast" strategy though. The whole point is to run the government out of money so it is forced to reduce or shut down programs that are otherwise quite popular. That's why we implemented huge handouts to billionaires and not one but two unfunded wars.

Can you elaborate on what the "starve the beast" strategy is?

Re: Why Are Corporations Hoarding Trillions?

#84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

#4 was really "tax breaks for the rich". The check everyone else got was just an early chunk of their normal refund check. Surpluses are a big problem to the "starve the beast" strategy though. The whole point is to run the government out of money so it is forced to reduce or shut down programs that are otherwise quite popular. That's why we implemented huge handouts to billionaires and not one but two unfunded wars.

> and not one but two unfunded wars. Afghanistan was certainly a justified war, and Iraq was done under false pretenses and badly executed, but (if done right) it would have been worth the effort. Fighting oppressive regimes is always worth the price. The only thing that must not happen (yet again) is to fuck up the "what happens after neutralization of regime forces" part. Implementing a Marshall-like plan for Afgha…

One can argue that even with a Marshall-like plan the region was doomed from the start. The country is not homogeneous like a European nation or especially Japan. It is made up of several ethnic groups who all want to dominate/eradicate the others. The British carefully drew the lines in the middle east to make sure the powers there would never be a threat to their empire and would instead be forever embroiled in petty tribal rivalries and incessant power grabs. It also insures that whomever is in power doesn't care about roughly half of the country and will almost certainly be corrupt as hell.

The only power system that seems to work is the hideously authoritarian dictatorships, because they're the only ones who can make people believe that everybody is being oppressed equally and who have the agility to violently and ruthlessly quash uprisings while they are still small and peaceful.

Of course even if the maps were redrawn to match the ethnic boundaries you would still have fairly regular border skirmishes. Due to the gender politics in the region there is always a need to get rid of the excess young males, and fighting otherwise pointless border wars is the time honored way to accomplish that.

Re: Why Are Corporations Hoarding Trillions?

#85
Expenditures and investments by these companies have to be justified on the basis of expected returns. The constraints sequestering the money:

- Valuations for acquisitions that exceed expected ROI. - Taxes on repatriated funds. - Dearth of top-end human talent to manage the acquisitions and investments. - Pervasive fear in corporate board rooms that the day of reckoning for quantitative easing and US debt is still ahead. - Changing demographics whereby consumers wealth is held by low spenders (older folks), rather than high spenders (younger folks).

Its a combination of factors.

Re: Why Are Corporations Hoarding Trillions?

#86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they sure as shit won't throw a bone to employees (whose wages have been stagnant for a decade) Labor rates have been stagnant for a decade -> disposable income is eaten up be inflation -> consumers have less money to spend on new and novel products and services -> there's less incentive to invent new and novel products and services -> there's no innovative companies to invest in -> companies pile up cash in bank…

In real terms, wages have been stagnant since 1981-ish.

Sadly it is even worse - think early 70s. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/09/for-most-wor...

Re: Why Are Corporations Hoarding Trillions?

#87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

#4 was really "tax breaks for the rich". The check everyone else got was just an early chunk of their normal refund check. Surpluses are a big problem to the "starve the beast" strategy though. The whole point is to run the government out of money so it is forced to reduce or shut down programs that are otherwise quite popular. That's why we implemented huge handouts to billionaires and not one but two unfunded wars.

Can you elaborate on what the "starve the beast" strategy is?

Spend recklessly until the government is out of money, then use the crisis as an excuse to cut back on popular services.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast

Re: Why Are Corporations Hoarding Trillions?

#88
The US is out of demand. Workers are spent out. Thus, there's no need to increase output, because nobody has the money to buy it. The US has huge excess manufacturing capacity, thousands of malls which could handle more traffic ("there's always parking at Sears", a rather pathetic ad), and services which could handle more business. There's a glut of capital, plenty of available unemployed or underemployed workers, no shortage of commercial real estate outside of a few cities, but no way to use it.

The CEO of WalMart has mentioned this. They have a direct view into the spent-out economy - same-store sales data. Sales decline each week after payday, then recover after payday. Sales move to necessities later in the month.

That's why companies aren't investing in capacity.

Re: Why Are Corporations Hoarding Trillions?

#89
post #51

The economy grows and you get inflation when interest rates are lowered. It shrinks and you are likely to get deflation when rates are raised. The rate lever was getting reduced over the last 30 years and is not at zero. Anyone can see the only way for rates to go is up, and the value of cash is likely to increase in the near future. I honestly don't see any need for mystery in that. There's also the notion that a co…

What's the point of stabilizing stock, price, when instead you can just have cash in bank plus an unstable lowe price stock?

Keeping the stock price high fends off hostile takeovers and negative feedback loops from nervous sellers.

This is my main theory about why companies are hoarding cash. They're tired of being at the mercy of the traders.

Re: Why Are Corporations Hoarding Trillions?

#90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you expect your shareholders to get much better overall tax treatment on the money sometime in the relatively near future, it makes a lot of sense to hold on to it. Especially with respect to money earned abroad, I'd think that's a decent guess. In particular, I'd expect there will be another one-time-only-we-really-mean-it-this-time repatriation holiday in 2017 or 18.

> In particular, I'd expect there will be another one-time-only-we-really-mean-it-this-time repatriation holiday in 2017 or 18. Nobody even really takes advantage of those because it isn't about repatriation. It's about the interest. If you have a pile of cash (really investment securities) held by MegaCorp in some low tax jurisdiction, it pays the low tax rate on the interest the money generates. If you repatriate t…

Qualified dividends are taxed at the long term capital gain rate. One time, special dividends aren't, but that's just a reason to use a regular dividend instead.

Investors could just sell shares if they wanted to raise money, but then they lose out on future growth in the company's value. Sending out profits to shareholders in the form of a regular dividend allows owners to have a concentrated investment in the business the company is in rather than it being diluted with some low risk / low return pile of investments.

The 2004 holiday saw about $312B repatriated. That may not be a huge number compared to the $1.9T discussed in the article but it hardly supports the claim that "nobody even really takes advantage".

Post reply on HN