351–360 of 690 posts
The fact that my home state billed us an Inventory tax on items we had on the shelf further pushed the business to keep inventory as slim as possible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://ourworldindata.org/covid-deaths Compare cumulative for Sweden and UK. It's two countries away.
Great. Now compare Sweden, Norway, and Finland. The UK is culturally different and not a neighbor.
Anyone who has played Factorio knows that "just in time" is far superior to actually holding reserves. If you buffer things up, you don't know where the problems in your production are. People are saying "why didn't we buffer up more" ? Well, there we go. Play Factorio. You'll see just how bad buffers are in a simulated factory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's interesting -- do you have a link for some background information?
https://www.rha.uk.net/News/News-Blogs-and-Press-Releases/Bl... More detail, but that's a propaganda article.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, the capital owning class just doesn't care if their businesses go into shock because they already have their cash in hand. They'll never go back to pre-ROE days because they'd have to live with less money and worse less control. While they still have personal reserves in the billions they can decide the fate of their ventures but if say 20% of their current cash was on the balance sheets of corporations with boa…
> GM and the rest of Detroit got their rear ends handed to them by the Japanese and their application of JIT GM and the rest of Detroit got their rear ends handed to them because they'd underinvested in fuel-efficient engine designs (the lost 70s) and grown lazy in reliability. Lean manufacturing may have allowed Japanese manufacturers to price more competitively and be more agile, but at the end of the day, they inc…
You're leaving out some pressures which caused Detroit to be un-competitive in the small car space, including high labor costs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would not call that 'cash in hand'. I get why you see it that way but to compare it to the little guy: A credit card with a $5000 limit is not $5000 cash in hand. It's a 'line of credit' for $5000 and whether I actually have the cash to pay that back is a different story. I might actually have $0 cash in hand to pay that back and many people don't until their next paycheck arrives. Any guesses how far the Oracle sh…
It is true that it’s not cash in the wallet but it’s there available if you want it. It is in no way comparable to paycheck to paycheck living. This practice also comes with all sorts of tax benefits as well. If they really need to pay some of it back then the company might decide to buy back some shares. And realistically, like the old adage says: If you owe the bank $1M it owns you, if you owe the bank $1B you own…
The little guy had cash in hand for maybe 24 hours (and even then probably just a certified check). Maybe a little later, say 10 years in they get a home equity line of credit and the bank takes back the previously paid off part of the house as collateral again.
I don't doubt repossession of the little guy's house is easier and happens more often than a Bezos loosing his collateral :) and for every Bezos there are probably quite a few small and medium business owners that put their businesses as collateral to get that line of credit and that did get repossessed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>2020 feels like the biggest shock to the economy in a while yet it was one of the best years for most big businesses. by what metric?
Stock market valuations
He clearly misunderstands the relationship between accounting and pricing goods. Companies price goods to maximize profits.
I doubt companies routinely try to pay extra taxes to make their accounting books look better. Companies still try to pay as little tax as they can. Maybe they do it when they hit an IPO to get a better initial prices but usually more goes into valuation of a company than their GAAP accounting sheet.
The only good point he almost touches on is determining who should bear the risk on a 100 year flood event, the company or the consumer. With JIT, the consumer bears more risk in the supply chain. It's not seen if this is actually a bad thing.
Lastly, his whole shtick seems to be centered around being against the billionaires tax. Sorry Ryan Petersen, Founders don't provide extra stability to the supply chain because they are more conservative.
He's right to point out that the obsession with RoE is a big part of the problem. He's wrong to suggest that the billionaire class and founders will solve the problem if we only trust them and let them keep their money. Founders have just as much incentive to optimize the excess out of the system, they just call it "disruptive innovation" by which they mean tweaking how the system works so that they can squeeze out p…
why blame the players rather than the game? It's the government's job to prioritize long term health of the nation Plenty of people warned about the hazards of allowing these companies to outsource everything, government did nothing. Mostly because they are bought off by lobbyists. This could have pretty easily been prevented by putting tariffs on key industries to keep manufacturing here or at least in North America
> tariffs on key industries to keep manufacturing here or at least in North America
im pretty sure massive lobbying would incur... but maybe im not seeing the whole picture.