Re: Tax bill
 

[quote=BaltimoreSkins;1186488]I don't know but I am a BCPS teacher in a Maryland state pension plan. Every pay period 7% of my salary gets taken out of my paycheck and I get no option to how it is invested. To top it off there is no guarantee I will ever be able to withdraw the money much like SS. I know it is very conservative of me but I would prefer if I was required to invest the money but given the option to how I want to invest it. The major difference being that SS helps all walks of people but my plan is exclusively for educators. If you are in the education business you should be smart enough to know how to invest securely IMO.[/quote]

Not necessarily ,don't assume that becuase one has a degree...in anything one knows how to invest or deal with Wall Street. many highly educated people ,smart,very smart people invested with Bernie Madoff and lost millions.


[url=http://www.lastplace.com/smart_people_make_bad_financ.htm]Why Smart People Make Bad Financial Moves by Laura Rowley[/url]

Re: Tax bill
 

Sorry double post

Re: Tax bill
 

Why would anyone in their right mind ever invest with the Mets ownership? I have seen what they do with investments it is not pretty.

Re: Tax bill
 

The Walt Disney Company is giving out $1000 bonuses to US based employees. That's 125K people receiving an extra $1000.

And no, it's not just going to executives.

[url=http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/os-bz-disney-bonuses-tuition-20180123-story.html]Disney to give $1,000 bonuses to over 125,000 workers - Orlando Sentinel[/url]

Re: Tax bill
 

...and on the other hand.



[url]https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/23/business/kimberly-clark-layoffs.html[/url]

Kimberly-Clark, the maker of Huggies and Kleenex, is laying off about 13 percent of its work force and shedding factories worldwide, amid declining birthrates that are affecting diaper sales and a retail price war that is weighing on profits.

The company said Tuesday that it would cut between 5,000 and 5,500 jobs in an effort to reduce expenses as it faced stiffer competition for consumer staples like tissues, paper towels and wet wipes.

To help pay for the cuts and other restructuring moves, Kimberly-Clark said, it will use savings from the recently enacted corporate tax cut.

Re: Tax bill
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1186483]I guess you work there, did they not switch over to the 401k or is it a major dropoff in benefits?[/quote]

we also have a 401. they match 6% on the dollar. they have upped it to 9% starting in march, and ending in december. my beef is the pension is quarenteed money. the stock market is what it is, as we have learned from 2008. they also enjoy some of the highest profits they have ever had. that, coupled with those tax breaks, was this move really necessary?

Re: Tax bill
 

[quote=Giantone;1186518]...and on the other hand.



[url]https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/23/business/kimberly-clark-layoffs.html[/url]

Kimberly-Clark, the maker of Huggies and Kleenex, is laying off about 13 percent of its work force and shedding factories worldwide, amid declining birthrates that are affecting diaper sales and a retail price war that is weighing on profits.

The company said Tuesday that it would cut between 5,000 and 5,500 jobs in an effort to reduce expenses as it faced stiffer competition for consumer staples like tissues, paper towels and wet wipes.

To help pay for the cuts and other restructuring moves, Kimberly-Clark said, it will use savings from the recently enacted corporate tax cut.[/quote]

OK yeah I think you are having trouble interpreting what you're reading.

They are looking at the underlying demand for their business and seeing it declining - fewer babies equals less need for diapers. That is completely separate from the tax plan. What they're saying is they can't make as much money selling diapers, so there isn't as much income to be taxed going forward.

So they're going to lay people off because they can't sell as much. In order to give out the severances for those layoffs, they'll use savings from the tax bill.

So in other words... they had to lay people off no matter what because not as many people are buying diapers and baby wipes. The tax bill though is enabling them to give better severance packages than they otherwise would have.

Re: Tax bill
 

[quote=dmek25;1186523]we also have a 401. they match 6% on the dollar. they have upped it to 9% starting in march, and ending in december. my beef is the pension is quarenteed money. the stock market is what it is, as we have learned from 2008. they also enjoy some of the highest profits they have ever had. that, coupled with those tax breaks, was this move really necessary?[/quote]

Sucks man. Hopefully you're starting to look around for other jobs. You may be able to find a better compensation package elsewhere.

Re: Tax bill
 

[quote=Schneed10;1186538]OK yeah I think you are having trouble interpreting what you're reading.

They are looking at the underlying demand for their business and seeing it declining - fewer babies equals less need for diapers. That is completely separate from the tax plan. What they're saying is they can't make as much money selling diapers, so there isn't as much income to be taxed going forward.

So they're going to lay people off because they can't sell as much. In order to give out the severances for those layoffs, they'll use savings from the tax bill.

So in other words... they had to lay people off no matter what because not as many people are buying diapers and baby wipes. The tax bill though is enabling them to give better severance packages than they otherwise would have.[/quote]
I thought trump and the tax bill were all about jobs and helping companies develop more jobs in the US.

Re: Tax bill
 

[quote=Giantone;1186576]I thought trump and the tax bill were all about jobs and helping companies develop more jobs in the US.[/quote]

And I'm sure a tax bill can make the birth rate go up, too.

An MBA discussion group this is not. Goodness gracious.

Re: Tax bill
 

[quote=Schneed10;1186578]And I'm sure a tax bill can make the birth rate go up, too.

An MBA discussion group this is not. Goodness gracious.[/quote]


So you can only make diapers in certain facilities,maybe retool the facility to make a different product?


I see being part of the real working world is elusive.


3.3 Billion profit ,I'm sure they could find something for those employees to do.

[url]https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/01/23/580029629/kimberly-clark-announces-layoffs-along-with-3-3-billion-in-operating-profit[/url]

Re: Tax bill
 

[quote=Giantone;1186585]So you can only make diapers in certain facilities,maybe retool the facility to make a different product?


I see being part of the real working world is elusive.


3.3 Billion profit ,I'm sure they could find something for those employees to do.

[url]https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/01/23/580029629/kimberly-clark-announces-layoffs-along-with-3-3-billion-in-operating-profit[/url][/quote]

:doh:

Re: Tax bill
 

[quote=Schneed10;1186578]And I'm sure a tax bill can make the birth rate go up, too.

An MBA discussion group this is not. Goodness gracious.[/quote]

I see you ignored the comment from the tangerine president and would rather take a swipe at me instead.

The tax bill is funding the layoff's,is that the intent of the tax bill,to help companies lay off workers or was it to help "create jobs",like we were told?

Re: Tax bill
 

[quote=dmek25;1186523]we also have a 401. they match 6% on the dollar. they have upped it to 9% starting in march, and ending in december. my beef is the pension is quarenteed money. the stock market is what it is, as we have learned from 2008. they also enjoy some of the highest profits they have ever had. that, coupled with those tax breaks, was this move really necessary?[/quote]
No,probably not. This is an old article from 2011 but a good one.


[url]https://www.kiplinger.com/article/retirement/T047-C022-S001-what-killed-pensions.html[/url]

Re: Tax bill
 

Not every company is going to be a pillar of the community. There is a reason there is a cynical belief about corporations. But most are going to act in the interest of their stockholders, and that includes being a company that hires and works to keep employees with competitive wages and benefits. I am sure you will always be able to find negative examples and there will be positive equivalents. The expectation Schneed is talking about is that the majority of companies will see more benefit to long term tax advantages then short term grabs.