What to do with $1.84 Trillion?

[Feanor]

>>OK: typo in poll question that I can't fix -- should be 1.84 not 18.4<<

According the a report yesterday in the Toronto Globe and Mail newspaper, U.S. non-financial corporations are sitting on a cash trove of $1.84 trillion. The reason we are told is "uncertainty" with respect to the economy. Of course there is always some uncertainty and, of course, capitalism is about bold risk-taking, right?

So if you were a responsible (or choose an adjective) director of a big corporation, what would you want to do with your profits earned thanks to the patronage of American consumers?

[kexodusc]

Guess it depends what industry I was in and what the situation was. I'm not a big fan of paying out dividends when liquid assets have grown primarily out of aggressive cost cutting rather than growth on the sales side or proven, sustainable enhanements in productivity though.

How about hiring back some of the people laid off for the purpose of hitting nominal balance sheet targets just so the executives trigger their bonuses again?

[GMichael]

>>OK: typo in poll question that I can't fix -- should be 1.84 not 18.4<<

According the a report yesterday in the Toronto Globe and Mail newspaper, U.S. non-financial corporations are sitting on a cash trove of $1.84 trillion. The reason we are told is "uncertainty" with respect to the economy. Of course there is always some uncertainty and, of course, capitalism is about bold risk-taking, right?

So if you were a responsible (or choose an adjective) director of a big corporation, what would you want to do with your profits earned thanks to the patronage of American consumers?

Sinse I have to play this as if I were responsible, I'll take domestic for a trillion Alex.

[ForeverAutumn]

Screw the little people. I'd buy a big-ass yacht!

[Feanor]

Guess it depends what industry I was in and what the situation was. I'm not a big fan of paying out dividends when liquid assets have grown primarily out of aggressive cost cutting rather than growth on the sales side or proven, sustainable enhanements in productivity though.

How about hiring back some of the people laid off for the purpose of hitting nominal balance sheet targets just so the executives trigger their bonuses again?
This is what I've heard from a few sources, i.e. that many companies have no intention of hiring back the people laid off. And, whether or not hit hard by the recession, many have used it as pretext to reduce expenses, including staff.

Expense saving have, apparently, yielded real, discretionary cash: what to do with it? Some right-wing pundits have suggested companies will wait out the "uncertainty" which they equate with the possibility of higher taxes on account of the need of western governments to tackle persistant deficits.

Ah! the ubiquitous right-wing solution of lower taxes. Yet the current situation puts the lie to the notion that lower taxes invariably leads to greater domestic investment -- or at least it shows that having lots of cash around does not inevidably lead to investment.

Personally I would like to see an "invest it or loose" tax regime wherein there would be substantial taxes on corporate profits, (either on the corporations in their own right as "individuals" :wink5: , or attributed to their shareholders), offset by tax credits when and where they can prove that they have made new investement in domestic plant & equipment.

[Feanor]

Screw the little people. I'd buy a big-ass yacht!
AH! YES! The option I forgot: Pay it out in executive bonuses. :devil: