[tanx16]

> "Another issue with all the 'BS' jobs in large corporations is that it takes profits away from shareholders who are most often the pensioners and retirement accounts of the rest of America," he said. "...they are also taking money away from the rest of the workforce's retirement programs."

Oh no, think of the poor retired shareholders!

[FredPret]

That's ... basically every old person and everyone with some savings.

Even if you don't own Google stock (or even any stock) directly, you likely have exposure to it because it's in the S&P 500, which is used as foundational financial product in many contexts.

[tanx16]

Yes, I'm mostly making fun of the fact that this extremely wealthy investor is pointing at the elderly (who likely have a higher percentage of their retirement saved in bonds and less-volatile investments) and distracting everyone from the fact that he benefits massively more if Google decides to make shareholders more money.

[hot_gril]

True, but it's weird how many times he mentions retirement in particular.

[bdcravens]

Stockholders are the owners.

[hot_gril]

Yeah but stockholders aren't necessarily retired.

[bdcravens]

Sure - the state of life an owner is in shouldn't be relevant, in terms of the company's obligation to them.

[FredPret]

True but

- everybody should have the opportunity to retire

- that means they have to save & invest

- that means corporations have a moral duty to do their best

- if an old person entrusted my company with the financial results of their life's work, I'd feel a lot of pressure to make good on the implied promise that I won't just take the money and put my feet up

[hot_gril]

I don't see why retirement is relevant here. Company's duty is to its shareholders either way.

[1234letshaveatw]

because old people don't matter?