Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (543756)	1/14/2010 2:09:28 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1575523

If these companies are in good enough shape to afford massive bonuses Essentially that's "if these companies are in good enough shape to pay the agreed upon compensation to their employees". The plan is to raise $90 billion over the next decade -- which, for this industry, isn't exactly an overwhelming burden If its not huge for the industry, its even smaller for the US government. But it will raise costs for the consumers of these companies. As Inode pointed out business pass along taxes (normally to employees or consumers) "Firms that raised prices would give smaller rivals a competitive advantage, creating an incentive for companies instead to swallow the cost, potentially by reducing employee pay." The bigger rivals presumably have economies of scale, and have lower costs to manage each dollar. As for reducing employee pay, the point that Obama's trying to raise applies, the employment market is also a competitive market, if the tax does mainly hit employees of these companies than pushing down the pay for these employees would give an advantage to other non-taxed companies. The money that was loaned should be paid back, but as for the money that was just given to the companies, well for the most part I was against that, but if your going to impose conditions on it the proper time to do so is before your hand over the cash.