She also made $29,000,000 in 2022 for herself, cause she worked so hard and made so many cars herself. Ha

  • Veedem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    ·
    1 year ago

    Stock buybacks need to be made illegal again. I don’t understand how it’s anything other than market manipulation.

      • StickyLavander@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        He’s was the first paid actor, just a puppet so the people in control can remain unknown. Skull and bones secret society was/is a real thing.

        • iBaz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not a secret, we know who the billionaires are that are funding this madness, but the only people that could put a stop to it, are the ones benefiting from them.

          • MisterD@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            So we’ll have to eat them for real.

            The announcement of the first TRILLIONAIRE should cause a worldwide civil war.

    • db2@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      It makes sense if they’re pulling out of the stock market entirely, in that case it’s just settling the books. Any other reason is to manipulate the price. The whole stock market is a house of cards controlled directly by a few self-titled elites though, so chicanery is literally built in and always was.

    • JasSmith@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree. I could live with it if it were merely a way to defer taxes, but the U.S. has something called the stepped-up basis. This allows people to inherit stocks without paying tax on the capital gains. The wealthy can live their whole lives without paying any tax. Both stock buy-backs and the stepped-up basis severely undermine the stock market and tax system.

        • porkins@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I am an MBA and agree that buybacks are fine. The problem is toxic anti-capitalism from my perspective. People are not really educated well on these topics. I find your comment funny that an army of accountants come to explain things and help everyone understand the nuances and why this is needed, but all the experts are somehow shills.

          • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            The problem is toxic anti-capitalism

            It’s not like capitalism is doing itself (or the 99%) any favors. When it’s blatantly clear that the ultra rich and short-term profit seeking are responsible for a lot of world problems (extreme pollution, climate change, corruption, being essentially immune to most laws), being “toxic anti-capitalist” is a natural step.

              • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                That was probably more valid before WW2. Afterwards, it’s mostly government (military) spending and financing that really funded the innovations we’re using today, at least regarding computers and electronics

                • porkins@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The modern PC was developed in a garage. Linux was a pet project. Uber and many other companies was funded by the previous success of another app. The owner sold StumbleUpon to eBay for $75M then used that money to make a killer rideshare app. SpaceX, Tesla, Streaming media. I beg to differ on whether most innovation is government funded. There are thousands of entrepreneurs that prove you wrong on that point.

    • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree. They need to do a reverse split if they want to change the shares in circulation.

      The idea was a company could show faith by buying their own stock. Now ceo pay is tied to factors associated with the stock that can be manipulated by buying it back.

      The IBM bro Ginny made millions while the company shrunk by manipulating the stock.

      I don’t care what a ceo makes. I do care what they do. If they’re only focusing on themselves, I care.

    • Snipe_AT@lemmy.atay.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      If I’m being honest, I don’t understand this angle. Why are stock buybacks immoral or wrong? Isn’t it simply using extra cash in a company to buy back stock from shareholders? With the same demand and reduced total stock, of course the price is going to go up. But the total market capitalization remains the same. I don’t understand why this is somehow wrong. Can someone help me out?

      • Veedem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because executive pay is largely given in shares, so it incentivizes the leadership to invest funds in buy backs to inflate the price of the very shares they own instead of investing that money into employee pay or other company centric initiatives.

  • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    1 year ago

    Keep these CEO memes coming. These assholes need to have a spotlight shown on them. A company is not a person, a company is ran by people.

  • PorkRollWobbly@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    1 year ago

    They could’ve paid for all of the UAW’s asks and then some with just that but it’s less about the money and more about trying to look strong. The reality is they are nothing without their workers, no company is.

    • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just like how the losses the entertainment industry has suffered due to the writers and actors strike could have paid for their demands 10 times over. This is 100% about stripping the power from workers and keeping the power in the C suite.

      • MNByChoice@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I wonder if the companies were expecting a recession to strengthen their hand. Turns out, we don’t need them.

  • _cnt0@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    A tale as old as mankind. Like 20 years ago I saw a movie. Some indie thing from France or Spain. The kind of shit that gets highly acclaimed at the Cannes film festival. In one scene there was a bricklayer reciting a poem (from the top of my head and loosely translated from German):

    My grandfather was a bricklayer. My father was a bricklayer. I am a bricklayer, too. But, tell me, where is my house?

    That allways stuck with me.

    • _cnt0@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I did some brain jogging and I think in German it went like this:

      Mein Vater war ein Maurer. Sein Vater war ein Maurer. Auch ich mauere Tag ein Tag aus. Doch sag mir, wo steht mein Haus?

      Which would translate to

      My father was a bricklayer. His father was a bricklayer. I, too, wall up day in and day out. But tell me, where is my house?

      But I can’t figure out what the movie was.

  • grazing7264 [they/them, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If stock buybacks are Capital’s path of least resistance it will self organize, like iron shavings to a neodymium magnet, and make it happen. There is no human agency in the circuits of capitalism and never will be.

    If this woman tried to not do stock buybacks, she would be fired by her peers/board and replaced.

    If this woman was even capable of considering doing pay raises instead of stock buybacks, she would have been clocked and removed from the circuit like an intelligent species crashing into the fermi paradox/great filter.