Tax bill

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Giantone

...and on the other hand.



https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/23/b...k-layoffs.html

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.

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.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

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.

I thought trump and the tax bill were all about jobs and helping companies develop more jobs in the US.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Giantone

I thought trump and the tax bill were all about jobs and helping companies develop more jobs in the US.

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

An MBA discussion group this is not. Goodness gracious.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

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

An MBA discussion group this is not. Goodness gracious.

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.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...erating-profit

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Giantone

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.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...erating-profit

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

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

An MBA discussion group this is not. Goodness gracious.

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?