Effect of economic crisis on America’s small businesses [slides] • Hacker News Board

Re: Effect of economic crisis on America’s small businesses [slides]

#491

Post by sershe » Sun, Mar 22, 2020, 4:54 PM UTC

toast0 wrote: post #67

lettergram wrote: post #2

One thing that really horrified me was how quickly people threw away the economy. Unfortunately, this virus is highly contagious (to the point that the vast majority of countries won’t contain it) and fairly lethal. We don’t actually know how lethal, but it appears 1%-3%, but without widespread testing we wouldn’t know. At the moment, we just reduced our GDP by 30%-50% in regions under quarantine. Think about that fo…

I don't think the options are have a lockdown vs have a functioning economy and a bunch of sick people. Once hospitals start overflowing with this, you're not going to have a functioning economy anyway. If hospitals can get the supplies they need, and testing and health department capacity is there to do contact tracing, the lockdowns can loosen, and our economy can start back up. Bonus points if the warmer weather i…

Why won't you have a functioning economy? How long did the effect of Spanish flu on the economy last? And that one mostly killed young people.

Re: Effect of economic crisis on America’s small businesses [slides]

#492

Post by WalterBright » Sun, Mar 22, 2020, 7:43 PM UTC

6510 wrote: post #486

WalterBright wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The beauty of capitalism is "we" don't decide CEO pay. The owners of the company do, and it's paid out of the owners' pocket. Anyone is free to start a corporation, name a CEO, and pay him whatever they want to (from their money). They can even name themselves CEO!

I'm sorry, I should have explained what seems so obvious to me. Let me try put it more sensible... We have a finite amount of labor and a finite amount of resources available to us. The thing our governments lack since the days of lords and god kings is direction. This is necessary since a group of people poorly working together isn't smarter than the smartest person in that group. We all do stupid shit at times, if…

> We have a finite amount of labor and a finite amount of resources available to us.

There is an infinite amount of labor available - because of improvements in efficiency. The manpower required to make a shirt has declined by something like 99% in the last 200 years. For growing food has dropped a similar amount. And on and on.

Resources are infinite because they can always be re-used and re-purposed for other things. For example, despite everyone eating chicken and ham, there is no looming shortage of chickens or pigs, because people figured out how to raise them efficiently.

Re: Effect of economic crisis on America’s small businesses [slides]

#493

Post by senordevnyc » Sun, Mar 22, 2020, 8:26 PM UTC

zaroth wrote: post #490

senordevnyc wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I stand by every comment I’ve made. I’m not the least bit surprised. Yes, my attack is personal, in the sense that it’s aimed directly at you and your reckless disregard for people’s lives. You’re spreading dangerous and false ideas in the face of a global pandemic, ideas that will cost tens of millions of lives if people take them seriously. There’s no reason anyone should listen to you, since you have no expertise,…

I stand with the experts that I’ve been citing. You should log off if you can’t maintain civil discourse. You couldn’t be more wrong with your accusations, and I will continue to lend my perspective to this debate with a slant toward long-term macroeconomic thinking that I believe is essential in managing a global health crisis, and saving the most lives long-term.

Except the experts have disagreed with you from the start. You think we’re shutting down countries all over the globe against the advice of public health officials? Or even economists?

I have no doubt you can produce a “citation” of someone that agrees with you, especially if you twist their words to support your point. But you’re not seeking the truth, you made up your mind a long time, which is why the vast majority of experts disagree with you.

And I have zero doubt that you lack the shame and introspection to stop posting now, about something you know nothing about and have been wrong about all along. You should be ashamed though, you’re part of a movement costing lives. And I won’t be “civil” while you do so.

Re: Effect of economic crisis on America’s small businesses [slides]

#494

Post by digitaltrees » Sun, Mar 22, 2020, 8:40 PM UTC

airstrike wrote: post #436

digitaltrees wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not arguing they are mathematically identical. I am highlighting some of the meaningful differences. Stock buy backs make stock prices go up. Dividends do not. Stock buybacks have timing risk dividends do not. If an executive is paid in stock, and has compensation tied to stock price then there is an incentive to conduct stock buy backs and not issue dividends. Further, declaring a dividend sets future expectati…

Dividends also make prices go up. They're just priced in in advance. Look it up.

This response is not productive in moving discourse forward. If you have something constructive to add then do so without ignoring the bulk of my arguments while only focusing on one element and interpreting it in the weakest possible way. To that point of course dividends affect stock price to some extent. So does almost everything, paying off debt would, buying new equipment. But for the sake of simplicity and conciseness I made a generalization. I look forward to a reasoned debate. These are important issues for leaders of companies and society at large.

Re: Effect of economic crisis on America’s small businesses [slides]

#495

Post by dang » Sun, Mar 22, 2020, 9:54 PM UTC

senordevnyc wrote: post #480

zaroth wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I stand by every comment I’ve made. None of which included personal attacks. Most of which included citations. Your personal attack is entirely inappropriate. I suggest perhaps it’s you that should take a break from the discussion. As we can see just looking at how different countries have responded, there is a wide spectrum of responses, and countries have been successful getting R0 below 1 with different approaches…

I stand by every comment I’ve made. I’m not the least bit surprised. Yes, my attack is personal, in the sense that it’s aimed directly at you and your reckless disregard for people’s lives. You’re spreading dangerous and false ideas in the face of a global pandemic, ideas that will cost tens of millions of lives if people take them seriously. There’s no reason anyone should listen to you, since you have no expertise,…

Please stop posting flamewar comments to HN. We ban accounts that do that, regardless of how wrong the other person is or you feel they are. You owe this community better if you're posting here, particularly now, when stress, fear, and anger are at higher than normal levels, and nobody knows exactly what is happening.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Edit: unfortunately, it turns out that you've been doing this so much that I've banned your account (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22659159). Please don't create accounts to break HN's guidelines with.

Re: Effect of economic crisis on America’s small businesses [slides]

#496

Post by dang » Sun, Mar 22, 2020, 10:04 PM UTC

senordevnyc wrote: post #493

zaroth wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I stand with the experts that I’ve been citing. You should log off if you can’t maintain civil discourse. You couldn’t be more wrong with your accusations, and I will continue to lend my perspective to this debate with a slant toward long-term macroeconomic thinking that I believe is essential in managing a global health crisis, and saving the most lives long-term.

Except the experts have disagreed with you from the start. You think we’re shutting down countries all over the globe against the advice of public health officials? Or even economists? I have no doubt you can produce a “citation” of someone that agrees with you, especially if you twist their words to support your point. But you’re not seeking the truth, you made up your mind a long time, which is why the vast majorit…

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22659159

Re: Effect of economic crisis on America’s small businesses [slides]

#497

Post by airstrike » Mon, Mar 23, 2020, 1:17 PM UTC

digitaltrees wrote: post #494

airstrike wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dividends also make prices go up. They're just priced in in advance. Look it up.

This response is not productive in moving discourse forward. If you have something constructive to add then do so without ignoring the bulk of my arguments while only focusing on one element and interpreting it in the weakest possible way. To that point of course dividends affect stock price to some extent. So does almost everything, paying off debt would, buying new equipment. But for the sake of simplicity and conc…

Ok.

> Stock buy backs make stock prices go up. Dividends do not.

Not true. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividend_discount_model

> If an executive is paid in stock, and has compensation tied to stock price then there is an incentive to conduct stock buy backs and not issue dividends.

You're touching on agency costs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agency_cost), which is a broader issue than stock buybacks. Management can always game their actions to favor their self-interest (compensation) over shareholder interests. They can also choose to invest in projects that will make the company look good in the short-term at the expense of long-term profits to shareholders, because management can always just stick around for a few year before shit hits the fan. See, e.g. what Jack Welch did to GE https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/ge-ceo-feud-welch-vs-imm...

My point is the fact that share buybacks are yet another avenue for management to mismanage a company for their own benefit doesn't make them bad per se, or worse than stock dividends. Investors should evaluate share buybacks on a case-by-case basis to assess whether they believe

The solution is improved corporate governance predicated on having an top-tier Board of Director structure with a significant share of independent directors vs. an entrenched BoD. That's why ESG is an increasingly relevant theme. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental%2C_social_and_co...

Re: Effect of economic crisis on America’s small businesses [slides]

#498

Post by SamReidHughes » Mon, Mar 23, 2020, 7:23 PM UTC

ivalm wrote: post #459

SamReidHughes wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they were taking money out of the company by buying back stocks and sucking it dry, who are the people loaning them money to do this? Your story implies they're throwing billions into these companies without expecting to get their money back.

My story does not imply that at all. Prevailing interest rates are low so investors seeking returns are willing to take increased risks, especially if the bond is still prime (so as to match their mandate). Thus the rise of BBB. At the same time, bond ratings underestimate fragility of corporate debt (what's new, history is littered with "bond ratings underestimated fragility of X"). Combined with a bunch of moral ha…

I want to see companies run well, too. Nonetheless, companies should be able to take on debt and return money to shareholders at the same time. A simple example might be moving to a new headquarters. They decide to buy a property and build an office building. They finance this with a loan or bonds, because, well, they need cash to run their company, and that's the right financial vehicle for them. At the same time, they're doing dividends or share buybacks, because their owners want them to. Another example is just, you know, buying stuff or services and getting invoiced with a later due date. That's taking on debt.

Re: Effect of economic crisis on America’s small businesses [slides]

#499

Post by cc81 » Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 10:33 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #476

cc81 wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is as tough in Sweden, doctors and nurses have of course access to patient files but every access is logged and if someone is caught accessing files about a patient they are not working with they will be reprimanded or fired.

The last thing hospitals want to do right now is to fire doctors.

I mean sure, but I was just saying that countries outside US takes unauthorized access to personal medical data incredibly serious.