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

281–290 of 346 posts

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

#281

Post by Retric »

novok wrote: post #279
Retric wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The mortgage deduction on it’s own isn’t such a big deal but it suddenly makes a lot of things tax deductible which aren’t if you take the standard deduction. The tax code is complex largely to enable such seemingly subtle interactions.

What kind of stuff becomes tax deductible once you get beyond the standard deduction, that doesn't involve having a business, which doesn't have that standard deduction limit anyway? Charitable donations? Medical expenses if you have a really bad time and need to spend more than %4 of your income to cover it?

It’s a long list, the major one is state income taxes, also charitable deductions can cover charities you create which can be a big deal if something you’re doing anyway could qualify.

However, some oddities like theft of investments such as gold or artwork and even some fines can be deductible. So sure on it’s own the mortgage tax deduction isn’t always huge, but it’s rarely the only deduction someone could take.

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

#282

Post by __turbobrew__ »

ljm wrote: post #228
__turbobrew__ wrote: post #151

Covid has got me thinking about the government’s role in social welfare. Providing social welfare through money allows for people to misallocate the money or skim off the top of the money. For the vast majority of people their covid stimulation money did not go into their pockets, it went to their landlord or their mortgage holder resulting in a massive wealth transfer from public funds to banks and those who own lan…

> For the vast majority of people their covid stimulation money did not go into their pockets, it went to their landlord or their mortgage holder At a strong risk of over-simplifying, this is a problem solved by regulation. The problem is that you're suggesting we regulate the average citizen by replacing their money with rationed supplies. You've got it all wrong, the average citizen is entitled to freedom within th…

> The problem is that you're suggesting we regulate the average citizen by replacing their money with rationed supplies.

I’m not sure how my suggestion inhibits liberty on the individual. My suggestion is to simply change the way welfare is executed: instead of giving people welfare money you give them the actual goods they need to live a civilized life.

The economic system would still be capitalistic, just the welfare is handled differently.

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

#283

Post by __turbobrew__ »

hervature wrote: post #179
__turbobrew__ wrote: post #151

Covid has got me thinking about the government’s role in social welfare. Providing social welfare through money allows for people to misallocate the money or skim off the top of the money. For the vast majority of people their covid stimulation money did not go into their pockets, it went to their landlord or their mortgage holder resulting in a massive wealth transfer from public funds to banks and those who own lan…

How much food and what quality? Do I get to ask for tomahawk steaks every meal and an extra one to bring home to my dog? Is everyone entitled to an avocado or just those that live close to an avocado farm? There is no easy answer to this and you bet a government mandated system would be heavily lobbied to include/exclude certain things. For housing, do you get to decide where you live? Or does the government set up a…

> How much food and what quality? Do I get to ask for tomahawk steaks every meal and an extra one to bring home to my dog?

You would get rice, lentils, beans, vegetables, grains, etc. The raw food ingredients to live a healthy lifestyle.

Nobody on this type of welfare would be entitled to “luxury food”.

> For housing, do you get to decide where you live?

This would be the toughest part of implementing this system, I think. Managing the demand for welfare housing on the regional level. Ideally you would just move to one of the several social housing complexes in your city, but managing capacity would be tough since it can take years to build new accommodations.

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

#284

Post by fruityrudy »

Jiocus wrote: post #133

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…

I think people make the mistake of thinking that the people who get bonuses are easily replaceable.

The executive market of people who have experience at these kinds of levels is extremely thin. Your company needs to be attractive to this high echelon of talent.

That means keeping a good record of treatment to executives.

I think the thought of: “just pay them less or they can leave” is pretty common. But it’s just not easy to recruit at this level and the responsibility is huge.

There is a slight PR angle to avoid looking greedy, but its moreso just the nature of the talent market at this level.

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

#285

Post by deathtraphomes »

sizzle wrote: post #280
deathtraphomes wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, I moved into one of invitation homes a few years ago. Looked nice when we drove up, didn’t think about why all the windows were open when we signed paperwork. Their negligence nearly killed my family, and left us with life long injuries. The gas line was leaking natural gas, improper installation? the furnace and stove were emoting lethal levels of carbon monoxide. Detector was defective. A portion of the AC fell…

This sounds like an issue with that specific home. I’ve never heard of a home with this nanny life threatening issues not be condemned by fire or county authorities.

House had issues. A simple home inspection would have uncovered a lot. Lots of things out of code.

Various workers IH sent admitted they were told to do as little as possible to make it look good.

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

#286

Post by donmcronald »

coliveira wrote: post #273
donmcronald wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Basically whoever gets the free money first get to buy / invest before anyone else even realizes the money supply has been diluted. The way money is printed and given directly to the rich via the financial industry needs to stop. If the money supply needs to be increased every year it should be done by giving it directly to the masses via UBI or similar. I'm starting to have the opinion we've been getting scamme…

Well, the system we now have was designed by the same people who are now becoming super millionaires and billionaires. How should it be different?

50 years of trickle up economics would be a good start IMO.

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

#287

Post by clusterfish »

Sharlin wrote: post #212
clusterfish wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How much food and what quality? Food stamps make this back into a "how much money" question without getting into execs pockets.

Food stamps are degrading and paternalistic, though, by design. Their whole point is "we won't give you real money because we don't trust you to not misuse it."

I mean we could just give money to people instead of bailing out corporations, that would be good enough by me. Or place strict conditions on corporate recipients of welfare. I'm just tired of news like this.

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

#288

Post by ab_testing »

slowhand09 wrote: post #67
ralph84 wrote: post #3

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

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.

Just a data point here. My company got a five million loan that got written off. The company claimed that around 120 jobs were at risk. However the truth is that since we are a consulting firm and our clients continued our services, the jobs were never really at risk and the owners made off with 5 million. For a company that has yearly profits in the low one million range, the owners did hit a lottery while cutting our salaries at the same time .

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

#289

Post by jbeam »

csomar wrote: post #270
azinman2 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right so then after cash runs out no one has a job and no businesses exist? Companies are more that just a collection of people.

If you give cash to people, they'll use to buy stuff from corporations, Mom&Pop, and uber food. That should create jobs?

The situation was that businesses were not allowed to be open.

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

#290

Post by necovek »

shkkmo wrote: post #271
necovek wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buybacks are not mentioned in this article, and you quote a number from 2019, which is, to the best of my knowledge, pre-pandemic. If you are saying that they foresaw the pandemic and government grants, well... Now, I wouldn't be surprised that they were doing that even in 2020, considering they were also taking out $3B in loans (in addition to $100M of subsidies) to maintain the share value or reinvesting in themsel…

You have entirely missed the point. Which subsidies are bigger is irrelevant to what I said. The financial quarter the stockbuybacks happened under is irrelevant to what I said. When a company has used so much of their recent cash in stock buybacks, it is disingenuous to call stock bonuses ethically different than cash bonuses. To say the same thing another way. If the company was willing to issue those stocks to pay…

What's to suggest bonuses would not have been paid out in stocks even without the bailout money?

To me it reads as if grants reduced the loans they'd be taking, but they've rewarded their top execs with stock (meaning they need to have a lot of trust in company to they just arranged 3B worth of loans for).

To clarify my point: I just do not see a connection between bailout money and bonuses (mostly paid in stock), which the OP emphasizes. Your point stands regardless of subsidies.

Post reply on HN