Hacker News Reader

Comment by batmenace | Hacker News Reader

Monstly agree - but dividends that go to every owner aren't unfair per se, a cap on dividends would be very good, though. As for options, depending on the company they can be a hiring incentive, and not being able to grant any may restrict the company going forward - has to be evaluated carefully.

View on HN

>but dividends that go to every owner aren't unfair per se

If these companies are in such dire straits they need the infusion of cash provided by a government bailout, where did the money to pay dividends come from? Shouldn't they use that money to pay employees and fund their operations?

I've heard arguments for dividends/buybacks in the scenario where the government does a terrible job of picking companies that actually need a bailout and ends up throwing money at a healthy company, in which case the only way for that money to reach decent investment opportunities is for the company to pass on the money to its own investors in the form of buybacks and what not. I don't really agree with the concept since bailouts are supposed to be for keeping big domestic employers alive and not some 10 person juicero startup an ocean away but the money does eventually end up funding someone's job so it's not completely useless.

This is just making a stronger argument for not bailing out corporations at all and giving out more of the money by sending checks to individuals.

If companies need money they can sell shares, and then people have more money to buy the shares with. If that's what they want. If everybody has the money and nobody thinks a particular company is worth saving, why are we saving it?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com