Quote:
Originally Posted by JustRalph
Do you not know who “stockholders” are?
Your graphic is not only inaccurate, it’s churlish towards common people who carry stocks and bonds in their retirement accounts.
It’s also directly in line with the Dem theme of drawing lines between the so called rich and the less than rich. Americans are finally figuring that out. Blacks especially. Keep beating that drum......it’s working so well
|
From the Forbes Magazine website, the last 4 paragraphs of an article entitled "
The Ugly Truth Behind Stock Buybacks", dated February 28, 2017. The key point is in italics below:
_____________________________________
...It’s gotten so bad that I literally keep a “Hall of Shame” list of buybacks offenders on a whiteboard in my office, and the list grows every day. Buybacks are supposed to be funded with excess cash that the business doesn’t need for innovation or expansion. But Rule 10b-18, the rule proposed in 1982, gives executives total power (and a blank check) to determine their own incentive-based compensation
Now, it should be mentioned that I don’t believe that all buybacks are bad. In some cases, a company may truly have an undervalued stock, and using excess cash to repurchase shares is actually a prudent, if not potent use of that shareholder cash. But right now, without shareholder approval, corporate boards freely swap a safe asset (cash) for a risky asset (stock).
In the end, it’s not the executives who get hurt. It’s the rank-and-file employees, as well as the investors who will see their pensions and 401(k)s decline. What I’m proposing is pretty straightforward: Not that companies should be prevented from authorizing stock buybacks, but that decisions to do so should simply go to shareholders for a proxy vote.
Where’s the controversy in that?.
link:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/aalsin/.../#45fd8d436b1e
