Thank you for the fruitful advice. Since you didn't care to answer the most important question in our short lived conversation, I think I'll follow it (I mean the advice now). By the way, I'wasn't talking about opinions. That was common sense. But your stubbornness will bring you far away from it, so don't even care. Stay healthy and good trading to you.
Sweat it not, gucci. The Trailer Park Trash never miss an opportunity to show their ignorance of all things that take the ability to count past three and see past their noses. Or other bodily members, as the case may be.
Why takes risks when there are other sources of funding, like taxpayers; Health Care Insurers targeting raises of policyholders, that they'll never see, for their rate increases, stadiums and arenas, instead of being paid for out of profits that instead come to rest in sport stars stratospheric salaries, find sin tax and similar public sector fundings, real estate, long held to be the safest place to park your money if you weren't up to riding the financial rollercoaster flux, seems that too has been discovered by a path of least resistance approach to what used to be risk taking. Should we have let them fail? That risk too would have been bourne most by its trickling down to paths of least resistance. Government Affairs departments at corporate are there for one thing, to game not government but taxpayers.
Were it me sitting on all that cash my reasons would likely be not very complicated. Obama is still in stimulus mode and that will have to mean future taxation and Democrats have a habit of RETROACTIVELY taxing business activities. That alone is enough to chill me regarding expanding my business in the US... and the stimulus taxation is currently weighting the economic recovery down just as it did under FDR so why not sit on cash until the recovery is pretty well a given and the private sector is bulldozing all this economic distortion out of it's way? We have these "coolest kids in the school" Liberals running things and they are truly immoral and brainless so yeah, were I in business I'd have a plan to scoop up the cash and relocate to fairer shores...
Can't say that I wouldn't sit on it myself if it were my call. Since it isn't and I'm more a taxpayer than a recipient of any corporate benefits then I'm with the side that actually has refs keeping the game within limits that coaches and players would happily violate if they got to decide whether that call on them was a foul or not. And the only people getting taxed are the ones who can more than afford it. Since noone is going to volunteer than we need adults to show them what their social responsibilities are. Theres more than enough in corporate coffers to take care of global competition and entitlements both of which are a drag on efficiency but the US economy is still 3 times what Chinas is. Fair? Now theres a word the defining of which is what this forum and the United Nations still haven't agreed on the meanings of.
Investing cash will create new jobs, spending will preserve existing jobs and saving cash will destroy jobs & economy. Bank interest rates in Japan 0.1% USA/Canada 0.25% UK 0.5% Israel 1.5% EU 1% India 5% China 5.31% Pakistan 12.5% Venezuela 19.3% http://to./43n2
The real problem is the busnesses or businessmen for that matter do not actually know what to do with all their cash. And this problem will only be getting more severe. The private sector (whatever it is) is facing the same problem. They maximize profits. This is actually the only goal the enterprises sooner or later will be forced to pursue. In order to do so they either have to expand (lobbying globalization) or getting more productive (cut down on their workforce and replace it with machines). Now some would argue that the production of those machines will create jobs so the macroeffect isn't negative. Well, this is an argument, which definitely lacks logic, but can be found in every shallow book about macroeconomics. It is contradiction at its best. By the way the term "economic distortion" was an interesting one. I have to figure out what it means or meant.