It's All Obama's Fault - DOW Jones reaches 16,000 for first time ever

[ghostwriterx]

Ok breh. If you are going to argue R&D spending doesn't lead to innovation I'm done here. Have a nice evening.

 

[Broke Wave]

How would you suggest that our society creates better products then? Do you think the notion of a profit motive to drive improvement, which capitalism is built on, is bullshyt?
If you want to get rid of most corporations, do you either think there is a better way for us to improve as a society which doesn't involve corporations?
Or do you think that it's not all that important for us to keep improving our medicines, computers, banking systems, communication methods etc meaning we are good with the technology we have?

You have me a little confused, I love business and capitalism. I think that the profit motive is responsible for a lot of the variety and spice we enjoy in life, I just don't like this fake system of capitalism which we all know to be called corporatism. McDonalds makes billions not because it's delicious (debatable I know) but clearly because they can be open 24 hours and be everywhere, also pay their employees zilch while using the cheapest materials and not having to pay for environmental costs. It's as simple as that. The costs of doing business have been artificially so lowered that innovation is stifled and we all pay for it out of our pockets.

 

[Suicide King]

Not sure what this means, "moving the goal post"?

Its hard to defend corporate profits because things moved along when the profits were much smaller.

Income inequality started to take root in the 90's, so its pretty recent.

Also, are people really arguing innovation over humanity. 1% of the population owns 40% of the wealth, and it wasn't always that way.

 

[Uncle Kingpin]

I love it, far too long people ignored the problems of the common man as long as they can buy a Xbox One.

I make 117k a year, so I'm not hurting, but this wealth inequality will come will a whole set of problems if the 80% lets it continue.

You gotta worry about the future, and for a long time people did not care much. And from I see, nothing has changed.

I'm in a higher than average tax bracket as well, and although i'm making more money than ever, I'm not ignorant to the effects of wealth inequality. Americans dont handle inequality or blatant unfairness the same way 3rd worlders do. The day is rapidly approaching where the average person will not be able to buy the latest iPhone, or buy a pack of cigarettes, or buy a pizza. Unlike the rest of the world where inequality is a way of life, Americans will revolt en masse. The only thing that has stopped this is everyone has their various pet issues (race, political party, sexual orientation, etc) dividing the focus of their anger. Everybody is angry but doesn't know where to direct it. Once enough people are suffering financially, i expect chaos. Literally, once the millionth person has had enough, it will be madness.

 

[ghostwriterx]

Not sure what this means, "moving the goal post"?

Anyway all the things people are defending as far as corporate profits are mute. Because this income inequality started to take root in the 90's. Also, are people really arguing innovation over humanity. 1% of the population owns 40% of the wealth, and it wasn't always that way.

yeah seemed like he wanted to change the argument from "corporate profits" to "r&d spending" Of course r&d spending is going to often lead to innovation, but corporate profits are not always funneled into r&d spending.

 

[Depreciating Asset]

yeah seemed like he wanted to change the argument from "corporate profits" to "r&d spending" Of course r&d spending is going to often lead to innovation, but corporate profits are not always funneled into r&d spending.

I thought you were saying I was taking my stuff and going home.

I've said now at least five times that I didn't suggest a one-to-one relationship. I studied accounting. Looked at plenty of balance sheets.

If a corporation spends 10-12% of their profit on R&D (i think this is about the average in Fortune 500 pharmaceutical firms) and of this spending 20% leads to innovation in the form of new useful technology, then that is still a clear relationship where increased corporate profits leads to increased R&D spending which leads to innovation. I don't think I was changing the goal post. I thought profits --> R&D spending was good enough since like you said "Of course r&d spending is going to often lead to innovation". But you are also right that corporations don't have to spend any money on innovation. I made an (I think safe) assumption that many of them would. But you are right. They could not spend any at all and then I would be wrong.

 

[Suicide King]

yeah seemed like he wanted to change the argument from "corporate profits" to "r&d spending" Of course r&d spending is going to often lead to innovation, but corporate profits are not always funneled into r&d spending.

He's not making a lot of sense, because his arguments are so damn academic and has so little to do with the ebb & flow of the economy in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and early 90s.

A lot this inequality is the product of this modern era of easy credit.

 

[Depreciating Asset]

You have me a little confused, I love business and capitalism. I think that the profit motive is responsible for a lot of the variety and spice we enjoy in life, I just don't like this fake system of capitalism which we all know to be called corporatism. McDonalds makes billions not because it's delicious (debatable I know) but clearly because they can be open 24 hours and be everywhere, also pay their employees zilch while using the cheapest materials and not having to pay for environmental costs. It's as simple as that. The costs of doing business have been artificially so lowered that innovation is stifled and we all pay for it out of our pockets.

I probably do have you confused. You probably have me a bit confused too. A discussion of whether or not profits --> innovation really doesn't say much about how I feel on capitalism and corporations in general.

Corporations do receive a ton of advantages due to their influencing power. They do receive loopholes and we do as taxpayers end up paying for their greed and disregard for the rest of us. I agree with all that.

I'm not sure how this stifles innovation though. Perhaps you are saying that if they really paid for the damage that they do to society and actually paid people living wages, then they would be forced to innovate more. I don't see the correlation but it could be there. Or perhaps many of them would go out of business and there would be more money in the hands of smaller businesses and more innovation would occur. This I could believe is true. Maybe we would be better off with less huge corporations and many more smaller entities.

 

[ghostwriterx]

I thought you were saying I was taking my stuff and going home.

I've said now at least five times that I didn't suggest a one-to-one relationship. I studied accounting. Looked at plenty of balance sheets.

If a corporation spends 10-12% of their profit on R&D (i think this is about the average in Fortune 500 pharmaceutical firms) and of this spending 20% leads to innovation in the form of new useful technology, then that is still a clear relationship where increased corporate profits leads to increased R&D spending which leads to innovation. I don't think I was changing the goal post. I thought profits --> R&D spending was good enough since like you said "Of course r&d spending is going to often lead to innovation". But you are also right that corporations don't have to spend any money on innovation. I made an (I think safe) assumption that many of them would. But you are right. They could not spend any at all and then I would be wrong.

Yeah I just think other factors are more important, namely competition and necessity especially when we talk about innovation that "contributes" to society. Really simple example, when Apple was struggling they came up with the Ipod which changed the game. Now that they pretty much wiped out the market not likely we're going to see any game changers coming from then in that area.

 

[Kritic]

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/dow-breaks-through-16-000-point-barrier-first-time-2D11603445




Do I know what the DOW Jones is?

Do I know what reaching 16,000 Dow points, runs, goals, or otherwise means?

Do I care?

Am I going to make this thread and talk about this shyt? You're God Damn right brehs

 

[Domingo Halliburton]

the federal reserve had more to do with this than anything

 

[Poitier]

Act like QE is a success brehs

 

[Domingo Halliburton]

...

 

[Domingo Halliburton]

Act like QE is a success brehs

act like you have a counterpoint, brehs

 

[Domingo Halliburton]

Act like QE is a success brehs

dont understand basic economics then hope Russia can bail your dumbass opinions out, breh