Microsoft effect: Incomes surge 3.7% (Excluding one-time dividend, U.S. incomes rise 0.6%)

Marketwatch ^ | 1/31/2005 | Rex Nutting

[KwasiOwusu]

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- U.S. personal incomes soared a record 3.7 percent in December, largely as the result of a one-time $32 billion dividend payment from Microsoft, the Commerce Department said Monday.

Excluding the dividend, incomes rose 0.6 percent, the government said.

Meanwhile, consumer spending increased 0.8 percent in December, as spending on durable goods jumped 4.3 percent.
.......................
The $32 billion paid out by Microsoft was reported as an annual $298 billion increase in December's income. The government estimates about $24.8 billion of the $32 billion was paid to U.S. residents...............

[KwasiOwusu]

Microsoft is now powerful enough to actually increase US personal incomes by to the tune of 3.1% for a whole month. That is simply awesome.

[rhtwngwarrior]

The $32 billion paid out by Microsoft was reported as an annual $298 billion increase in December's income.

So what happens next month when MS doesn't give out a $32B dividend? Will that be recorded as a $298B drop in income?

I can't believe the government can't factor in one time charges like this -- this is Finance 101.

[HAL9000]

It's simply awesome how Bill Gates sucks up to China's Communist dictators.

[donozark]

Maybe if the "Sage of Omaha," Warren Buffet began paying dividend via Bershire-Hathaway, a similar positive economic effect would occur. Guess he's content in keeping one of the largest tax shelters in USA the way it is. And Dems love him, and he loves them...

[KwasiOwusu]

"So what happens next month when MS doesn't give out a $32B dividend? Will that be recorded as a $298B drop in income? "


Read the last sentence in that article. It answers your question.
It says, and I quote :

"Of course, it will all disappear in January, when the data could show a 3 percent-plus decline in incomes."

The government has all that covered, and I'll wager they know more about finance than you do, Finance 101 or not. :)

[KwasiOwusu]

Hehehehehehehehehehehe.
Open source crazies alert!
We are talking about US personal incomes in December, dude.
Nothing about China here.

First it was Gates kills babies, and when that insane whine was taken apart, now its Gates is in bed with communist China.

That the best you can do?

Will you excuse me while I laugh?
BTW, I was one of those that collected that vast dividend payment, and I am still laughing all the way to the bank. :)

[ikka]

SO how much did you short the US Dollar by with your dividend payouts? That is what Gates is doing, shorting the USD and also talking it down... thanks Bill!

[KwasiOwusu]

Hey, didn't I point out to you in another thread that you don't need any excuse to attack Microsoft or Gates, with no respect to the topic on hand?
You quickly try and turn a thread about US personal incomes into an attack on Microsoft on China.
Here is proof if ever one were needed.
You simply foam off at the mouth anyway, knee jerk, insane, moronic rabidly anti-Microsoft attacks.
You are indeed sick.
Go seek help.

[KwasiOwusu]

"SO how much did you short the US Dollar by with your dividend payouts? That is what Gates is doing, shorting the USD and also talking it down... thanks Bill!"

I don't do currency trading.
I'll leave that to people like you.
As for Gates and the US dollar, the US Dollar will fall or rise due to what the currency traders , the markets, trade deficits, etc etc, irrespective of what Gates does or says, as its been doing for the past 60 years at least, long before Gates was even born.

I happen to think a falling Dollar is great for US exports which are running at near record levels right now, and good for US exporters like Caterpillar, Boeing etc etc.
But that is just my opinion.

[anniegetyourgun]

There are lots of professional MS haters around FR. Me, I just enjoyed my spike in personal income last month......all the way to the bank......

[LS]

Don't buy it. But if you do, under this logic, the MS lawsuits of the late 1990s then by themselves likely caused the tech turndown!

[HAL9000]

"Hey, didn't I point out to you in another thread that you don't need any excuse to attack Microsoft or Gates, with no respect to the topic on hand?"

It was probably the thread where you stated "China may be ruled by the Communist Party, but is China's economy "communist"? Nope."

"You are indeed sick. Go seek help."

Based on Bill Gates's pro-China/anti-American statements in Switzerland last week, you should be questioning his mental health.

[KwasiOwusu]

"It was probably the thread where you stated "

Nope.
It was the thread about Gates having already saved 700,000 African and other children's lives and Gates making another massive $750,000 Million contribution to save the lives of the poor and the dying in third world countries.


"Based on Bill Gates's pro-China/anti-American statements in Switzerland last week, you should be questioning his mental health."

Most African, Asian and American leaders (apart from the RATS of course), and most of the population of this country (from every poll I have seen, including polls at the height of the Klinton anti-trust attack), think Bill Gates is a great guy.
In fact polls show that most American's and even most Indians and Koreans have great admiration for Bill Gates.
Even the the anti-American British Financial Times has Microsoft as the most admired company on the planet for 3 years in a a row. Same thing with the top Korean business publication.
And here in America, Microsoft is a regular feature n the Fortune top 10 most admired companies.

So I don't have a problem with Gates's mental health.

You?
Most clear thinking humans will agree you are a stark raving, psychotic Microsoft-hating lunatic.
And that is even putting it politely.

[KwasiOwusu]

"Don't buy it. But if you do, under this logic, the MS lawsuits of the late 1990s then by themselves likely caused the tech turndown!"

What on earth are you prattling on about?
You are not making an iota of sense.

[KwasiOwusu]

This is the thread you want.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1328000/posts

[LS]

If the theory is that all Americans' income soared because of a dividend payment from one company, then everyone's incomes should have dropped in the late 1990s when that same company was under attack by the Feds. I don't think one company has that kind of effect on personal income numbers. Rather, I think this is a larger effect of the "Bush Boom."

[KwasiOwusu]

"I don't think one company has that kind of effect on personal income numbers. "

This is a free country, so of course you can think what you want.

The United States Department of Commerce (which is THE authority on personal incomes in America) begs to disagree with your point of view.
And with all respect to you, it's what the United Sated Department of Commerce says that counts.

More on the matter from Forbes:

"America's personal income skyrocketed in December by 3.7%. And that leap was turbocharged by the one-time-only dividend payment from Microsoft (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people ); the House That Gates Built paid out $3 per share on Dec. 2. The U.S. Department of Commerce on Monday said that December's income gain would have been a mere 0.6%, if not for the dividend payment. While it is rare for a single company's dividend payment to impact incomes so strongly, Microsoft is a rare firm. With one of the most widely held stocks in the U.S., the software colossus forked over $32 billion. Compare that to the $38 billion that Uncle Sam paid out in federal income tax rebates in the summer of 2001"


http://www.forbes.com/2005/01/31/0131autofacescan04.html

[grey_whiskers]

Melinda Kwasi, I hear the phone. I think Bill's calling you! ;-)

[LS]

Well, that's indeed a lot. So that suppors my view that the MS lawsuit, then, had to be monumentally damaging to the economy, because, among other things, it caused the price of MS shares to drop and to stay much lower than they would have been, thus further prohibiting the company from paying dividends.

[nygoose]

Why do I think the Feds don't have it all covered."