Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Booking.com gives €28m in bonuses to three top execs; Took €65m in State aid

nltimes.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 346 posts

Re: Booking.com gives €28m in bonuses to three top execs; Took €65m in State aid

#131

Post by comboy »

mdorazio wrote: post #73
slowhand09 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not rich here. Wife's company got COVID loans. They were forgiven. Company had to prove money was spent on rent, salaries, benefits. Company didn't make money on it. Employees were able to keep their jobs. No bonuses involved there.

Yes, and what did those employees who would have otherwise been unemployed spend their money on? Likely rent was the #1 item, thus transferring wealth from tax dollars to asset holders.

It's a bit more complex, but even avoiding how much value pleople get from paying their rent, only as much was transferred as there would be empty vacancies from people relocating elsewhere (or losing their homes and having nowhere to go). If elsewhere, they also pay rent to somebody. Plus somebody else would pay the rent when they are gone, just slightly lower (probably). That difference in rent price would be amount being transferred then.

Long story short it's more likely that they were able to buy other necessities and more food than they could without a job.

Your argument would work though if these were high paying jobs - that would likely only result in fewer luxuries being bought.

If money ends up in the hands of employees, then statistically by definition most of them are not the 1% and money equals higher level of living instead of more useless stuff.

Re: Booking.com gives €28m in bonuses to three top execs; Took €65m in State aid

#132

Post by ErikVandeWater »

yunohn wrote: post #63
sebmellen wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you replace "middle-aged white man" with "soulless corporate stooge" nearly anywhere this phrase is used, the replacement term will fit. The term "middle-aged white man" is a caricature of the extremely wealthy and powerful, even though (I believe) it is a misleading and inaccurate portrayal.

You say misleading caricature, yet all three of the people named in this article are middle aged white men.

Though I also agree it isn't misleading, using anecdotal evidence is not a good way to refute the claim.

Re: Booking.com gives €28m in bonuses to three top execs; Took €65m in State aid

#133

Post by Jiocus »

The title is almost underwhelming in severity (which is a refreshing break from sensationalistic headlines),

“[€28m in bonuses] even after taking three billion euros in loans last year, and 100 million euros in State aid including 65 million from the Netherlands. The company also let go of thousands of people during the coronavirus pandemic.”

Booking.com isn't alone engaging in these practices. Many corporations seem to defend these payouts, by suggesting that these executives have gracefully managed the organisation during the pandemic distress. Such statements aren't very reassuring, because they feel more like sound bites of opinion, rather than arguments that can be debated and examined.

How many jobs could they have saved with 28 million euros?

Re: Booking.com gives €28m in bonuses to three top execs; Took €65m in State aid

#134

Post by shkkmo »

necovek wrote: post #92

It seems that most of that €28M was "mostly" paid out in "shares": iow, minimal cash was transferred. That may make it both better or worse for everyone else at Booking.com (if shares go back in value as travel gets reinstated, it will effectively be more than that), but the aid itself was not used to cover these bonuses. Basically, Booking.com shareholders have redistributed their shares to a couple of employees. If…

The reason why Booking.com had no money and needed a bailout is because they spent billions on stock buybacks.

So when a company that does lots of buy backs later issues stock to pay bonuses, they might as well be directly using cash from the bailout.

Edit: For concrete numbers, Booking.com spent 5.5 BILLION on stock buybacks in the first half of 2019.

Re: Booking.com gives €28m in bonuses to three top execs; Took €65m in State aid

#135

Post by jakearmitage »

slowhand09 wrote: post #57
ralph84 wrote: post #3

Directly via bailouts and indirectly via inflation, COVID was the biggest wealth transfer to the rich in history.

I saw people buying firearms with stimulus checks more than anything else. I saw a couple buy 2 identical $1300 handguns at once. They were joking about the stim checks. And annoyed they'd have to wait a week to pick up their purchases.

What's the problem with purchasing safety devices during unstable times?

Re: Booking.com gives €28m in bonuses to three top execs; Took €65m in State aid

#136

Post by donmcronald »

beiller wrote: post #83
mminer237 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does inflation help the rich? Doesn't that devalue their net worth?

If everyone's bank account balance goes up by 50% uniformly, lets say one person has 100,000 and another has 10,000. After the increase they now have 150,000 and 15,000 respectively. But the low end item costs also go up due to inflation, so food now costs 50% more lets say. The thinking is that this eats into the lower bracket much more than the higher one. So inflation would increase the divide between rich and poo…

I don't think so. Both still have the same percentage of the money, so it should be even.

If a rich person thinks inflation is coming they can buy fixed assets, invest in resource companies, invest in companies that provide critical services (food supply, communications, etc.).

The problem for the poor is that it's hard to invest in things that benefit from inflation, especially if you don't have any money to invest. It's unlikely the paycheck-to-paycheck wages of poor people are going to go up enough to cover any kind of increase in (ex:) housing prices.

Or you have people like my parents whose (defined benefit) pensions aren't going to do well against inflation. They'll get to watch the value of their retirement income drop like a rock at the same time they've seen millionaires with "small" businesses pocket hundreds of thousands of "bailout" dollars they didn't really need.

Those millionaires will be the ones creating inflation by buying up fixed assets with their free government money. My parents will at least benefit from increased value in their house. Me and the generations after me that can't afford houses and don't have many fixed assets will get screwed really badly.

I can see it coming and there's not much I can do for myself :-(

Re: Booking.com gives €28m in bonuses to three top execs; Took €65m in State aid

#137

Post by jachee »

ipaddr wrote: post #100
maxsilver wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>mom and pop shop that is forced to close during the peak should receive money. No, they shouldn't. Don't give any money to any corporations, give all the money exclusively to people. If Mom and Pop run a business, they can get cash as humans to float their business, just like any human could. They could temporarily lay off all their staff (which is OK, because their staff are humans, and are also getting cash) There…

You force them to close if you want them to come back you have to keep them alive.

Keeping the humans alive should be sufficient.

Re: Booking.com gives €28m in bonuses to three top execs; Took €65m in State aid

#138

Post by derefr »

comboy wrote: post #131
mdorazio wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and what did those employees who would have otherwise been unemployed spend their money on? Likely rent was the #1 item, thus transferring wealth from tax dollars to asset holders.

It's a bit more complex, but even avoiding how much value pleople get from paying their rent, only as much was transferred as there would be empty vacancies from people relocating elsewhere (or losing their homes and having nowhere to go). If elsewhere, they also pay rent to somebody. Plus somebody else would pay the rent when they are gone, just slightly lower (probably). That difference in rent price would be amoun…

I think the idea isn’t that it was a net transfer from individual working-class people to the capital class, but rather a net transfer from city/state/country treasuries to the capital class.

How much of that translates to the rich getting richer, depends on what proportion of those treasuries’ funds originally came from taxes on the rich, vs. taxes on everyone else.

Re: Booking.com gives €28m in bonuses to three top execs; Took €65m in State aid

#139

Post by ocdtrekkie »

krono wrote: post #107
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, instead of funding either corporation, just give mom and pop money. Instead of business bailouts, we should've done regular, recurring stimulus checks that would help business owners cover bills while they're businesses were closed, and help employees cover bills while they're unable to work.

That is exactly what was done here in the Netherlands. Booking.com just decided to exploit and, in my opinion, abuse that system. Edit: These emergency financial support measures I was referring to are: - "Temporary emergency scheme for job retention" (NOW) - "Temporary self-employment income support and loan scheme" (TOZO) - "Reimbursement Fixed Costs" (TVL) More info (in English) on gov websites: - https://www.gove…

NOW appears to pay businesses up-front for, in turn, continuing to pay employees: https://business.gov.nl/subsidy/corona-crisis-temporary-emer...

Arguably, it would've been a much better system if the Netherlands just... paid people directly regardless of who they worked for at the time, so employers didn't need to worry about paying employees while they couldn't do normal business.

Re: Booking.com gives €28m in bonuses to three top execs; Took €65m in State aid

#140

Post by akomtu »

mminer237 wrote: post #27
ralph84 wrote: post #3

Directly via bailouts and indirectly via inflation, COVID was the biggest wealth transfer to the rich in history.

How does inflation help the rich? Doesn't that devalue their net worth?

When I reached the entry level wealth and cap gains started to dominate in my income, I realized one thing: there are two types of money, one for the poor (dollars) and one for the rich (stocks, assets). The gov keeps deflating dollars and thanks to complicated behind the scenes mechanics, that wealth gets transferred to assets that magically appreciate in value. When a recession hits, the gov evacuates the assets and leaves the dollars to their own devices. The poor can't get off the dollars because they have to spend everything they earn - another intentional arrangement in our economy. Moreover, cap gains aren't taxed. Only when you sell a small bit of them (or better: take a low interest loan), that small bit is taxed at laughable 20%. That's welfare for the rich. There's really no reason why cap gains (all gains, not just realized ones) can't be taxed at a progressive rate, as if it was income.
Post reply on HN