Leftie company ***** employees over ... publicly

[Supersteeler]

No matter how much I try, I can't think of a more idiotic waste of money. If only these people were around hundreds and thousands of years ago, we woulnd't have ever had any major weather crisis in the history of humankind. They could have stuffed $100 bills inside Mt. Vesuvius and prevented it from erupting. Just think of all the lives they would have saved.

 

[Confluence]

Not sure why anyone cares what a business does with its money, be it from tax breaks or profits. No doubt management cleared it with ownership, they're free do as they please. If the employees don't like it, go work at REI or NorthFace.

Patagonia has a solid track record supporting environmental issues, this falls right into what the company has always stood for. My guess is most folks working there support the decision. And if they don't, again, they're free to leave. Tax breaks are rarely filtered down to employees in any sector, usually just goes straight to shareholders as extra profits. Not sure what all the fuss is about.

I for one applaud a company wanting to help fight climate change, given our current government has their heads up their ***** on this issue.

Tibsy, 'ole non-contributor, we just might have some commonality.
I agree that you are in the perfect position to judge when someone, anyone has their heads up their *****.

You would know!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[MT~Forged]

Companies all have the right to do with their profits as they please, and they all do. Some take a windfall and invest it back into their business, some spend it on advertising in hopes of a net gain return, some reward loyal employees, some do **** just to say “look at me”. We have seen all the above by companies looking to capitalize on their decisions.

If it were me I would rate them in the following order 1 - 3 - 2 and never 4.
#1 buying back stock is the number one conservative thing to do, it allows you to take back more control of the company, since you give up control when you sell stock. This also allows a company to have more financial flexibility when times are tougher.
#2 employees are the life blood of a good company, and keeping good employees and rewarding their efforts, in most cases is by and large a very sound business decision. Employees that feel appreciated and whom get a taste of the rewards put out better effort for the company.
#3 Advertising is strictly a numbers game, as long as you continue to get a return on those dollars, you continue to spend them.
#4 the “Hey look at me” expenditure normally pisses off more people in the long run. Too many end up thinking that if you have that much money to “waste”, maybe you don’t need any of mine. See Dick’s Sporting Goods as an example.

 

[madinsomniac]

Hypocrisy is not having a problem with all the companies that ****** over their employees and used the tax cut to buy back stock instead.

I mean both are stupid.... donating to major charities like all these corporations do for the public recognition is basically worthless... they cut a check and 99% of that money goes to paying the charity overhead and salaries and the rest goes to some token image building cause that ultimately is meaningless....

Then they write that all off of future taxes and get the money back anyhow...
All good charity is personal and done in private... virtue signalling is for conceited charlatans...

 

[Buster]

And that will have absolutely zero effect on the Earth's climate. I'm sure the employees couldn't have made good use of that money.

Exactly...pissing in the wind.

 

[Tibs]

I agree that you are in the perfect position to judge when someone, anyone has their heads up their *****. You would know!

Captain Adolescent strikes again! Following me around thread to thread like a little, whiny *****. Have they taken the bandages off, where your balls used to be?

 

[Steelerfan]

The article used the wrong pronoun. Its "him."

 

[Smash]

virtue signalling is for conceited charlatans...

Exactly, the story was picked up from her announcement on her social media linkedin.

 

[JMM]

So in all seriousness how does giving money to the government or charities or whatever affect the climate?

There have been thousands of windmills planted all over the globe (to the detriment of birds, bats, natural views, and peaceful solitude--they make a totally unnatural sound) and solar arrays popping up in fields and rooftops. Is the world seeing any difference? Perhaps the green movement is just that. Perhaps it is just affecting the bottom lines of the companies that build the equipment and the governments that subsidize that non-sustainable industry. Or maybe it simply lines the pockets of someone in a charity very close to her. If we had investigative journalists that worked for an independent media, perhaps answers could be found.

 

[Smash]

So in all seriousness how does giving money to the government or charities or whatever affect the climate?

More money in the pocket of Big Brother means less money in yours to spend on the devil, fossil fuels. Carbon emissions reduced, problem eliminated.

 

[JMM]

More money in the pocket of Big Brother means less money in yours to spend on the devil, fossil fuels. Carbon emissions reduced, problem eliminated.

True but don't they buy bigger cars, jets, etc?

 

[Stewey]

Quote Originally Posted by Tibs

Not sure why anyone cares what a business does with its money, be it from tax breaks or profits. No doubt management cleared it with ownership, they're free do as they please. If the employees don't like it, go work at REI or NorthFace.

Patagonia has a solid track record supporting environmental issues, this falls right into what the company has always stood for. My guess is most folks working there support the decision. And if they don't, again, they're free to leave. Tax breaks are rarely filtered down to employees in any sector, usually just goes straight to shareholders as extra profits. Not sure what all the fuss is about.

I for one applaud a company wanting to help fight climate change, given our current government has their heads up their ***** on this issue.

So Tibs, how much does your company contribute to fight global warming?

...or is your head up your *** too?

 

[Stewey]

Will any of the board lefties respond?

Of course. They'll come up with something regardless of how far they have to reach or how much spin they have to put on it.
Add to that deflections and false equivalencies.

And they did.

 

[Stewey]

Companies all have the right to do with their profits as they please, and they all do. Some take a windfall and invest it back into their business, some spend it on advertising in hopes of a net gain return, some reward loyal employees, some do **** just to say “look at me”. We have seen all the above by companies looking to capitalize on their decisions.

If it were me I would rate them in the following order 1 - 3 - 2 and never 4.
#1 buying back stock is the number one conservative thing to do, it allows you to take back more control of the company, since you give up control when you sell stock. This also allows a company to have more financial flexibility when times are tougher.
#2 employees are the life blood of a good company, and keeping good employees and rewarding their efforts, in most cases is by and large a very sound business decision. Employees that feel appreciated and whom get a taste of the rewards put out better effort for the company.
#3 Advertising is strictly a numbers game, as long as you continue to get a return on those dollars, you continue to spend them.
#4 the “Hey look at me” expenditure normally pisses off more people in the long run. Too many end up thinking that if you have that much money to “waste”, maybe you don’t need any of mine. See Dick’s Sporting Goods as an example.

So if understand the gist of your post, #4 this company's "look at me" is the announcement of this waste of money?
I wonder why Tibs liked it then.

 

[Stewey]

Socialism is believing that companies will give tax breaks to their employees out of the kindness of their hearts. You’re one of the rubes who doesn’t understand the difference between capitalism and socialism and now you’ve got a chapped *** because I pointed it out to you.

Jeezus Trog...did you plagiarize a Nancy Pelosi quote? Or was that from your girl Maxine?

 

[MT~Forged]

So if understand the gist of your post, #4 this company's "look at me" is the announcement of this waste of money?
I wonder why Tibs liked it then.

My #4 comment was just that, Patagonia’s “look at me, I am better than you” contribution was nothing more than a PR stunt that supports their leftist beliefs. They have the right to do it, as do people also have the right to not support them. My wife has always loved Patagonia stuff, and bought herself a new jacket for me to give to her for Christmas, she took it back today. Her exact comment was “They obviously don’t need my money”. So as to not screw the local mom & pop shop, she got something else instead, can’t wait to see what I got her.

 

[Confluence]

This is virtue signaling, a marketing-like, esteem-filled mechanism whereby an individual or company ensures that all are aware of their preferences while making an insignificant or meaningless social/moral comment.

Patagonia could have said/done nothing, given back to investors or employees and yet chose the non-specific marketing based approach to essentially make a statement about their values. They probably do not expect to be held accountable for that token spending, although it was nice of them to cause others to offer up the decision tree of what they might have done.

Maybe they will just make a contribution to Al Gore.

Sent from my SM-N950W using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[SteelChip]

I'm sorry folks but I have to share here. I had no clue what patagonia even was. I thought that it was some research company or something. Then I looked it up and found out why I never heard of them.

They sell stuff I don't need for prices I can't afford. I remember getting a bag just like this free for buying a years subscription to a magazine.

Black Hole® Duffel 120L
$169.00


Being retired and living in the Florida woods does have it's advantages I guess. We definitely don't do a lot of fleece......LOL

 

[Smash]

True but don't they buy bigger cars, jets, etc?

Truth Cat explains better than I can JMM

 

[Troglodyte]

Jeezus Trog...did you plagiarize a Nancy Pelosi quote? Or was that from your girl Maxine?

You did realize this thread is about Trumptards bitching about a company exercising its free will and not giving its tax break to its employees, don’t you?

I thought the argument that companies would give tax breaks to employees was just to placate socialists, turns out you guys actually believed it.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

I'm sorry folks but I have to share here. I had no clue what patagonia even was. I thought that it was some research company or something. Then I looked it up and found out why I never heard of them.

They sell stuff I don't need for prices I can't afford. I remember getting a bag just like this free for buying a years subscription to a magazine.

Black Hole® Duffel 120L
$169.00


Being retired and living in the Florida woods does have it's advantages I guess. We definitely don't do a lot of fleece......LOL

Yeah but some of the profits go to companies pretending to have an effect on the climate, so you should feel good about buying their stuff.

 

[Superman]

You did realize this thread is about Trumptards bitching about a company exercising its free will and not giving its tax break to its employees, don’t you?

I thought the argument that companies would give tax breaks to employees was just to placate socialists, turns out you guys actually believed it.

right. that's what the thread is about. a company exercising its "free will". right.

 

[tapeANaspirin2it]

Not sure why anyone cares what a business does with its money, be it from tax breaks or profits. No doubt management cleared it with ownership, they're free do as they please. If the employees don't like it, go work at REI or NorthFace.

Patagonia has a solid track record supporting environmental issues, this falls right into what the company has always stood for. My guess is most folks working there support the decision. And if they don't, again, they're free to leave. Tax breaks are rarely filtered down to employees in any sector, usually just goes straight to shareholders as extra profits. Not sure what all the fuss is about.

I for one applaud a company wanting to help fight climate change, given our current government has their heads up their ***** on this issue.

Interesting. So now you believe that nobody has the right to tell a private business how they spend their money.

You also seem to be coming out in favor of at-will employment. If they want to make more money, they can go work at NorthFace. How does that square with the liberal demand for $15 minimum wage? Why do libs have a problem with WalMart and what they pay?

 

[tapeANaspirin2it]

You did realize this thread is about Trumptards bitching about a company exercising its free will and not giving its tax break to its employees, don’t you?

I thought the argument that companies would give tax breaks to employees was just to placate socialists, turns out you guys actually believed it.

That’s not what this thread is about at all. Conservatives do believe Patagonia has the right to piss away their money.

The point of this thread is showing the hypocrisy of the left who are dead against companies getting tax breaks because they will just take the profits for themselves and not pass it on to their employees.

Now we have a liberal company publicly pissing away their tax break money and Libs will stand up and applaud onky because they like where they sent the money.

Company A gets a tax break and gives some raises to employees then buys some new equipment to grow the business. Liberal reaction - **** You! you didn’t need that tax break. You are killing the economy. We can’t afford this tax break.

Company B sends tax break to a left wing cause. Yippee! This is an example of how businesses should be run. What a great example of corporate responsibility. I can’t wait to spend 5x as much for their goods as comparable goods available.

 

[Troglodyte]

That’s not what this thread is about at all. Conservatives do believe Patagonia has the right to piss away their money.

The point of this thread is showing the hypocrisy of the left who are dead against companies getting tax breaks because they will just take the profits for themselves and not pass it on to their employees.

Now we have a liberal company publicly pissing away their tax break money and Libs will stand up and applaud onky because they like where they sent the money.

Had Patagonia used the money to buy back stock or pay executive bonuses, I’d see the hypocrisy. What they did was call the tax breaks irresponsible and donated theirs to a cause they believe will benefit everyone.