Replies

Even if the actual risk factor etc. is taken into consideration it's cheaper to do work in other countries because over here, the laws and lawyers sue companies to the ground and the insurance premiums to cover that costs a bit.

Clearly we also need to work for torty reform lower taxes and less regulation but that does nothing to change the need for tariffs.

A tariff on all the companies would reduce the number of companies, reducing the number of jobs and this would be a greater impact than the jobs lost in this case.

A tariff is a duty laid upon an imort not a a domestic company. If company wishes to purchase a product in the uSA there is no tariff. Please understand that tariffs similar in function to a sales tax they are a tax on the consumption of products produced in other nations. They are voluntarily paid in the sense that no one forces anyone to buy an offshore product.

Sprint's (and other co's) shares would fall because shareholders reward a company for layoffs, and penalize them if they don't squeeze the employees.By this definition then if a company went out of business by laying off everyone theuir share prices would rise incredibly. Would you please at least try to make some basic sense.

Re: Layoffs.

I am making basic sense, you're just extrapolating without making any sense. Watch the biz news, whenever a company lays off workers, the stock markets reward them, under the impression that they're improving the bottom line. You can't deny that.

however, the company will lose employee morale and the productivity of the remaining may actually go down (my theory, since I'd consider people to either get so scared that the quality of work suffers or they do anything to improve, but it can go either way).

Saying that if they fire everyone they'll have killer stock prices, is, to put it bluntly, stupid. It's like saying that if a bit of Prozac makes you slightly better, why not down the whole lot?

No, my rant is that the stock markets reward a company for indulging in the tactics you're condemning. And those stock markets are run by folks who own the stocks who, in most cases are ordinary Americans. So, what's the point of blaming a CEO if he's just following the dictates of his shareholders??