Try the political quiz
@ISIDEWITHQuestionseconomyStarted 2yrs agoActive 2mos ago

Should the government tax stock buybacks?

Stock buybacks are the re-acquisition by a company of its own shares. It represents an alternate and more flexible way (relative to dividends) of returning money to shareholders. When used in coordination with increased corporate leverage, buybacks can increase share price. In most countries, a corporation can repurchase its own stock by distributing cash to existing shareholders in exchange for a fraction of the company's outstanding equity; that is, cash is exchanged for a reduction in the number of shares outstanding. The company either retires the repurchas…  

Read more

179 Replies

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2yrs2Y

Yes

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2yrs2Y

No

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2yrs2Y

Yes, but I would prefer if they were banned

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2yrs2Y

No, the biggest beneficiary of stock buybacks are pension funds and mutual funds

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2yrs2Y

No, there is no evidence that firms that engage in buybacks reduce their investments

 @B2F9LQRfrom Alberta  answered…2mos2MO

No, but make sure that there are regulations in place to prevent bad things from happening

 @9LJGNWTPeople’s from British Columbia  answered…11mos11MO

No, and there should be NO income tax on personal income or personal investment income.

 @9DW7GRSfrom Ontario  answered…2yrs2Y

Not enough knowlege

 @99GCM75New Democraticfrom Texas  answered…2yrs2Y

I do not know enough on the topic to hold an informed opinion

 @9CCTQ3Zfrom Ontario  answered…2yrs2Y

not really sure what this means

 @9CBVH5CConservativefrom Alberta  answered…2yrs2Y

I don't understand?

 @9BFGCVKLiberalfrom Alberta  answered…2yrs2Y

i dont knw what tat is

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…4mos4MO

Peace Over Party: Arab American Leaders Stun Democrats with Mass Trump Endorsement

Former President Trump earned endorsements from "highly respected" Muslim leaders and Imams during a campaign rally in the battleground state of Michigan. Trump, speaking to a crowd in Novi, Michigan, on Saturday afternoon, called the group of Muslim leaders "highly respected," before bringing them onstage."I’m thrilled to accept the endorsement of these highly respected leaders," Trump told the thundering crowd.The group of leaders cited Trump’s commitment to ending wars and ensuring global peace as a primary reason for their support, describing him as a leader who "promises peace, not war.""We, as Muslims, stand with President Trump because he promises peace, not war!" Imam Belal Alzuhairi said. "We are supporting Donald Trump because he promised to end war in the Middle East and Ukraine," Alzuhairi said. "The bloodshed has to stop all over the world, and I think this man can make that happen. I personally believe that God saved his life twice for a reason.""We're going to stop the wars, we're going to make the United States safe again, and we're going to make the world safe," Bazzi said."What a nice endorsement," Trump said after Bazzi’s speech. "These are great people."The Muslim leaders official endorsement came after Amer Ghalib, the mayor of the Detroit-area suburb Hamtramck, announced his support of Trump in a Facebook post on Oct. 20."Though it’s looking good, he may or may not win the election and be the 47th president of the United States, but I believe he is the right choice for this critical time," Ghalib wrote in Arabic on his Facebook page. "I’ll not regret my decision no matter what the outcome would be, and I’m ready to face the consequences. For this, and for many other reasons, I announce my support and endorsement for the former, and hopefully, the next President of the United States, Donald Trump."Ghalib’s endorsement of Trump comes after the two met in Flint earlier this week for a private 20-minute conversation. Ghalib told The Detroit News that Trump "knew a lot about me before the meeting." "We talked about various topics including the debates, the polls updates, the statistics of votes in Michigan and Wayne County, the Arab American concerns and the Yemeni Americans in particular. We also talked about the situation in Yemen," Ghalib said.

▲  622 replies

Active 14hrs ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3mos3MO

Defense Bill Blocks Transgender Care To Minors

The Senate on Wednesday gave final approval to a defense policy bill directing $895 billion toward the Pentagon and other military activities, moving over the objections of some Democrats who opposed a provision added late in the negotiations that would deny coverage for transgender health procedures for minors.The 85-to-14 vote, coming a week after a divided House passed the same measure, cleared the bill for President Biden’s signature.Most Republicans and many Democrats supported the measure, which provides a 14.5 percent pay raise to junior enlisted service members and a 4.5 percent pay raise for all other service members. It also expands access to meal assistance, housing and child care programs that benefit those in uniform.But several Democrats withheld their backing in protest of a provision preventing TRICARE, the military’s health care plan for service members, from covering “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization” for children under 18.The language, which would affect the gender-transitioning children of service members, was recently added to the measure at the insistence of Speaker Mike Johnson, Republican of Louisiana, who refused to bring a defense bill to the House floor without it, according to aides familiar with the negotiations.Twenty-one Democrats, led by Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, proposed an amendment to strip the provision from the bill, but the matter was never brought to a vote. Several of them took to the floor on Tuesday to lodge their objections.“It’s flat-out wrong to put this provision in this bill and take away a service member’s freedom to make that decision for their families,” Ms. Baldwin said, estimating that the provision could negatively affect as many as 6,000 to 7,000 military families.

▲  2019 replies5 agree1 disagree6