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

301–310 of 346 posts

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

#301

Post by diordiderot »

sangnoir wrote: post #292
manquer wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With weaker demand rents would have actually fallen a lot more than now. That in turn would have an impact on asset prices in the long term. Will it be fairer to employees ? I don't know, there will be lot more pain for employees without government intervention. However with Quantitative Easing or bailouts and COVID loans means the rich are not paying the same price as well, that is why rich are becoming richer, poor…

> With weaker demand rents would have actually fallen a lot more than now In this sentence, is "weaker demand" euphemism for mass homelessness?

It's amazing how sociopathic economics is without context

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

#302

Post by ajmadesc »

ChrisLomont wrote: post #90
ralph84 wrote: post #3

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

>via inflation The poor tend to be net borrowers. The rich tend to be net lenders. Inflation makes the poor less in debt by lowering the real value of payback. Inflation helps borrowers.

In 1970 *

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

#303

Post by Sharlin »

colordrops wrote: post #247
Sharlin wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This… has been tried, many times, and been found to not work too well. First off, unless you socialize the whole economy (well, that has been tried as well), government-provided food is still bought from somebody , by the government, and typically this is seen as a superfluous and inefficient extra step. Second, people very much like going to a supermarket and being able to pick their groceries and other necessities,…

Has it been tried without means testing in a capitalist system though? Where only the most basic necessities are provided to anykne who wants them, and you can buy whatever else you want beyond that?

Who is going to classify all zillions of goods offered by a modern market economy into “basic” vs “non-basic” necessities? Is triple-ply toilet paper basic? What about bananas? Beef? Coffee? A cellphone? A smartphone? After all, modern life is increasingly difficult without a Web terminal of some sort. Some luxuries become necessities over the years. It’s just utterly impossible to draw a line.

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

#304

Post by dalbasal »

icoder wrote: post #257
e17 wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has even sent like $3k straight into the accounts of every citizen over the course of the pandemic! As far as I'm aware no other major country has done helicopter money like thia

Here that would take care of your health insurance for 2+ years (basically covering your health care for that time regardless of any misfortune that comes your way), or more than half a year of (University) tuition. In US? Probably not so much. Taking into account other welfare benefits, minimum wages, etc would also be interesting. All I'm saying is to me it doesn't make sense to just look at that 3k and compare it…

IMO, that's whataboutism.

The topic at hand is "we are dumping money into the economy, how to do it." The curious point is that "give it to people" is an exceedingly rare solution. The primary recipients are banks (2009), large firms... occasionally public works and small businesses.

This was the case in europe and the US, but this time, unusually, a portion of the whole did go to people. In the EU, none did. It wasn't even considered.

The way health or education work is another matter, and it is not a decision Dutch parliamentarians of the current generation made.

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

#305

Post by Closi »

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."

> Their whole point is "we won't give you real money because we don't trust you to not misuse it."

Their whole point is to ensure the money gets used on what it was intended for.

People don't want the "money for the poor" food stamps being used to give the wealthiest citizens a small discount on their Ferrari - which means you then have to start means-testing. In OP's original point, you might be able to give everyone food stamps to basic rice for example without means-testing (because the rich aren't going to worry about going out of their way to pick up a packet of cheap rice).

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

#306

Post by ojosilva »

savant_penguin wrote: post #7

The real error here is public money being given to private companies. Let them break Fund people, not companies

Best yet is to fund measures to minimize disruptions and to help manage the economic meltdown caused by pandemics. And plan accordingly. The world was utterly unprepared to deal with a pandemic. Once we were somewhat better equiped with knowledge (ie. aerosols in closed spaces), procedures (widespread testing, ventilation, etc) and equipment (masks, ICU beds) the economy could function much closer to (a new) normal. But even today, if it weren't for vaccines, we would not be remotely close to where we are now, at least in some countries. A lot of the measures implemented were useless, including tech (ie phones), which failed to be of real service tracking contacts and infections.

Once enacted, countries or regions that don't abide to my wishful set of international rules on pandemic measures will be isolated or excluded by the community. Money otherwise would flow to implement measures everywhere and keep the world economy going at a good pace.

Here's a review on what I consider a great investment for these financial aids, making air filtering/ventilation and CO2 control ubiquitous:

https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2021/05/26/...

Also the economy would had suffered a lot less if there was a predictable schedule on how restrictions and, even stricter, lockdowns were applied according to some economists.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/experts-think-the-econo...

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-may-14-2...

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

#307

Post by hrbf »

Lately, every time I read something like this, I think: if you build/maintain a system where such behavior is possible or even incentivized, you will get more of the same behavior.

If you want this to change, at the very minimum, crooks in leadership positions need to be socially outcast, given a harsh prison sentence, their wealth confiscated and their legacies dismantled. Essentially, there need to be consequences. They need to lose what they care most about: their status, freedom and wealth.

From there, give them a clean slate to work on earning our trust again, to rehabilitate, the hard way. You know, like every convicted criminal should have the chance to.

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

#308

Post by necovek »

aembleton wrote: post #263
necovek wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add another wrinkle to your "proposal", the cost of moving is also very real. If a money helps you remain in your current home for a couple of months that allows you re-establish your income stream without having to both spend money on moving and disrupt your life entirely (imagine having kids switch schools along the way too). If you are going to help people in need, the best way to do it is with money. Sure, som…

> If you are going to help people in need, the best way to do it is with money. Why is money the best way to help people? We all need to eat, so why not provide basic nutritional food to your population?

As others have mentioned, you are quickly going to end up with government paying $5 per banana. And you'd have to add more administration to take care of allergies, religious requirements and similar.

With money, you decentralise all that and let people save on their own, and spend on the most needed items (maybe they just need fuel to drop off by their parents having a farm?).

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

#309

Post by nly »

tracer4201 wrote: post #108
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.

Are we saying a rent payment is a “transfer of wealth”? I’m not invested in real estate, but I imagine many people in real estate were just as impacted. Don’t you likely need to pay towards a mortgage and put some aside for capital and day to day maintenance? Your comment is written as if a rent payment is a transfer from one person to directly to someone else’s savings account. I’m not convinced this is true.

It's the power of capital vs the power of income.

If you have a high salary and no ability to save for a deposit then property can be unaffordable and you're stuck paying someone else's mortgage.

If you have a 5% deposit saved and a high salary, you still can't afford a home because lots of people are in your position and have driven up house prices and rates and leverage available sucks.

If you have 20-25% down and a high income you can afford a home to live in and it's probably cheaper than renting long term.

If you have 100% in cash then you can buy one to live and buy 3 more as buy-to-lets as a side business.

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

#310

Post by miltondts »

Sharlin wrote: post #303
colordrops wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has it been tried without means testing in a capitalist system though? Where only the most basic necessities are provided to anykne who wants them, and you can buy whatever else you want beyond that?

Who is going to classify all zillions of goods offered by a modern market economy into “basic” vs “non-basic” necessities? Is triple-ply toilet paper basic? What about bananas? Beef? Coffee? A cellphone? A smartphone? After all, modern life is increasingly difficult without a Web terminal of some sort. Some luxuries become necessities over the years. It’s just utterly impossible to draw a line.

At least in Portugal, this is done in the form of lower taxes.

Essential goods are at 6% VAT and the rest is 23%. Yes it's not perfect, but unlike how you paint this issue, it's far from difficult to implement.

Post reply on HN