ive got quite a selection but quite often i forget their namesMaybe you might consider broadening the people you listen too.
ive got quite a selection but quite often i forget their namesMaybe you might consider broadening the people you listen too.
ive got quite a selection but quite often i forget their names
i prefer names for references and then see where they agree on and where they dont say the same thing.Don't focus on names and personalities but rather on concepts and ideas.
obama once asked steve jobs what would it take to bring back apple jobs. steve jobs responded "“Those jobs aren’t coming back".Apple's cash hoard swells to record $246.09 billion
Apple's enormous cash hoard grew to $246.09 billion in the fiscal fourth quarter, up $8.49 billion from the previous quarter.
That figure is larger than Sri Lanka's estimated 2016 gross domestic product, but smaller than Denmark's, according to the CIA World Factbook.
The company's cash reserves have long fueled speculation of acquisitions that Apple might make. Apple keeps most of its cash outside the U.S. for tax reasons, but President Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress are expected to change rules on repatriation of cash stored overseas, which could make it easier for Apple to spend some of the money on acquisitions without taking a major tax hit.
Thanks ObamaAnd where is Steve Jobs today ?
Exactly .
what do you mean?And where is Steve Jobs today ?
Exactly .
I agree with the move but if these banks take risks and fail you must let them fail.i briefly saw today that trump is deregulating wall street some more. i say good. i hate capitalism; its way too centralized, bosses have too much power, and workers have too little. economic chaos will build support for anti capitalists out there who want worker cooperatives instead of capitalism.
im not holding my breath.I agree with the move but if these banks take risks and fail you must let them fail.
We all saw what happened in 2008 when that started to happen. All the big players are so interconnected that a failure of one will cascade and take down the whole system. They need to be broken up into smaller institutions where the risk of their failure doesn't threaten the entire global economic system.I agree with the move but if these banks take risks and fail you must let them fail.
That's exactly what should of happened in 2008 is the big banks should of been allowed to go under and their remaining assets divided up amoung many other smaller much more stable banks.We all saw what happened in 2008 when that started to happen. All the big players are so interconnected that a failure of one will cascade and take down the whole system. They need to be broken up into smaller institutions where the risk of their failure doesn't threaten the entire global economic system.
baba you post here but what is your point? are you anti monopoly or what?https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/03/business/dealbook/macys-hudsons-bay-company-takeover.html?_r=0
Macy’s has received a takeover approach from Hudson’s Bay Company, the Canadian owner of Saks, people briefed on the matter said on Friday. Talks between the two companies are at an early stage and may still fall apart or lead to a partnership of some kind rather than a sale.
It wasn't feasible to do it then. All the big players have so much interconnected debt the entire worldwide economy would have fully collapsed if they were allowed to fail. Smaller banks would not have been able to handle the debt load a breakup would entail at that time. It should be done now that things have stabilized. Cut them up and have them reorganize internally into smaller institutions.That's exactly what should of happened in 2008 is the big banks should of been allowed to go under and their remaining assets divided up amoung many other smaller much more stable banks.