Was starvation wages

When I suggested in a "starvation wages" sub thread, which posited companies don't pay taxes, they just pass these
along to the customer, that in [too] many cases the major corporations now depend on subsidies and tax preferences for most of their "profit", several people expressed doubts.
You may find the following of interest. 700 billion has been hijacked from the makers and savers and given to the corporate "takers" by just the FRB. The technical term for this is "financial repression."
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-17/bernanke-saves-companies-700-billion-as-apple-to-verizon-borrow.html <snip> Americas companies, from Apple Inc. (AAPL) to Verizon Communications Inc., are saving about $700 billion in interest payments with the Federal Reserves unprecedented stimulus.
Corporate bond yields over the past four years have fallen to an average of 4.6 percent from 6.14 percent in the five years before Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.s demise, a savings equal to $15.4 million annually per every $1 billion borrowed. <snip>
What in the way of *DOMESTIC* investment, job creation, and increased tax base has resulted? Wall Street is not Main Street, and the "market" is not the American economy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"F. George McDuffee" wrote:

illion-as-apple-to-verizon-borrow.html

You make a lot of unsubstantiated assumptions. Bond yields are low because the demand for bonds is extraordinarily high. Just because a reporter gives the FED credit doesn't make it so.
Nobody has twisted arms to get people to buy more bonds. The FED didn't create the demand for low risk assets.

What sort of job creation and investment do you expect? Businesses do those things when they forecast the increased
output can be sold. When they have no expectation of more sales they hang on to the money. But what is that "money" that the corporations are hanging on to?
Do you think large corporations hold bundles of Ben Franklin's or large savings accounts at the bank. The "money" they are holding for the most part is bonds.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Friday, September 20, 2013 2:03:12 PM UTC-4, jim wrote:

So you are saying that high demand has resulted in lower interest rates?
If that is true, why does a high demand for Gold result in higher prices?
Dan
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The interest rate is the opposite (inverse) of price, when we talk about bonds. The lower the interest rate, the higher the price of bonds.
For example, to simplify, a bond that promises to pay $100 in a year, would cost $91 if the interest rate is 10%, and $99 if the interest rate is 1%. The 1% bond is higher priced.
i
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Friday, September 20, 2013 11:56:40 PM UTC-4, Ignoramus3517 wrote:

You are right, I do not know what I was thinking, or rather not thinking. I really know better.
Dan
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 18:35:00 -0700 (PDT), " snipped-for-privacy@krl.org"

The interest rate offered on a bond is based on the anticipated market, or lack thereof, of the bonds. A bond that is issued by an entity that is perceived as being less reliable will be issued with a higher interest rate as the risk of ownership is higher and thus requires more incentive to buyers.
So, if the demand for the bond is expected to be high the interest payment will be low, and vice versa.
--
Cheers,

John B.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.