Should Trump Resign Over "Hellhole" Comment?

[carpedm9587]

In a utopian world, corporations would exist to give everybody high paying jobs and have positive effects on the environment. In the real world, most corporations exist to make money. If you were the owner of a hotel or resort (chain or not), would you NOT want your experienced trained people to be the ones actually running the place? ALL corporations could do better than they do on economy and local impact, but that's not why they're in business.

Businesses CAN place profits above everything else, or they can strive to balance profits with social justice. Many businesses do this, make it part of their marketing and public profile, and achieve a lot of good while they make money. There is no reason why a business, like Marriott or Hilton, could not initially staff a property with experienced management personnel from abroad, and then initiate a program to recruit and train local personnel with a goal of achieving a completely native staff (or as close as possible given the local resources). Both chains also have franchise models, so there is no reason they cannot seek out and encourage local franchise ownership using any of several models for doing so. It takes more effort, and it may dig into the bottom line a tad, but on a global scale, the effect would be negligible. These things are being done in some places, but nowhere near widely enough.

And when businesses engage in flat out unethical and unscrupulous practices to pillage a less knowledgeable/informed developing country (research the aluminum industry in the Carribean, as an example), then they both harm the developing countries AND further the message that U.S. companies are unscrupulous and all about money - at any cost.

[Cow Poke]

Businesses CAN place profits above everything else, or they can strive to balance profits with social justice.

Of course they can. You can, too!

Many businesses do this, make it part of their marketing and public profile, and achieve a lot of good while they make money.

And that's wonderful.

There is no reason why a business, like Marriott or Hilton, could not initially staff a property with experienced management personnel from abroad, and then initiate a program to recruit and train local personnel with a goal of achieving a completely native staff (or as close as possible given the local resources). Both chains also have franchise models, so there is no reason they cannot seek out and encourage local franchise ownership using any of several models for doing so. It takes more effort, and it may dig into the bottom line a tad, but on a global scale, the effect would be negligible.

And if you were the head of either of those corporations, you could do your best to convince shareholders, stakeholders, investors, partners, lawyers, etc. to do the same! As for the effect being "negligible", have you ever been in the hospitality business? They agonize over the cost - in pennies - of the little bottles of shampoo and conditioner in guest bathrooms.

And when businesses engage in flat out unethical and unscrupulous practices to pillage a less knowledgeable/informed developing country (research the aluminum industry in the Carribean, as an example), then they both harm the developing countries AND further the message that U.S. companies are unscrupulous and all about money - at any cost.

And that's a crying shame, it really is. Unfortunately, some of those places are so desperate for any kind of work for their people that they tolerate or allow all kinds of crap to happen. It's sad. So, what's your solution?

[EvoUK]

And that's a crying shame, it really is. Unfortunately, some of those places are so desperate for any kind of work for their people that they tolerate or allow all kinds of crap to happen. It's sad. So, what's your solution?

[Sparko]

Well I believe they do have to pay taxes in the countries they are located on. Both as a corporation, and real estate, and as an employer.

[carpedm9587]

Of course they can. You can, too!

And that's wonderful.

And if you were the head of either of those corporations, you could do your best to convince shareholders, stakeholders, investors, partners, lawyers, etc. to do the same! As for the effect being "negligible", have you ever been in the hospitality business? They agonize over the cost - in pennies - of the little bottles of shampoo and conditioner in guest bathrooms.

Yes. I have worked for both Marriott and Hilton in a variety of capacities, which is why I used them as examples. The agony of costs is not out of line with any other industry I have worked with. The outlet with the narrowest profit margin is the dinner-oriented restaurant. Breakfast/lunch outlets are cash cows as is the bar. If well managed, with a proper employee-to-room ratio and adequate occupancy levels, the room side of the house is usually fairly profitable. In my experience, the hotels that are "pinching pennies" are the ones that are poorly located or poorly managed.

And that's a crying shame, it really is. Unfortunately, some of those places are so desperate for any kind of work for their people that they tolerate or allow all kinds of crap to happen. It's sad. So, what's your solution?

In the aluminum industry, it was not about desparation. In the early-mid 1900s, when Bauxite was widely discovered in the Carribean, companies like Alcoa came into the countries and literally bought the land they would place their mines on. These countries knew nothing of "mineral rights" so they didn't know there was another way to structure it, and they readily sold the land. Except for low-paying and dangerous mining jobs, all of the management positions went to white managers imported from outside the area, and all of the value of the Bauxite was taken off the islands. Finally, in the 1970s and 1980s, the Caribbean nations banded together to address the fact that all of this ore was leaving their shores with absolutely no benefit to their nations. They began to pass laws and tarriffs that would return some of the money from the bauxite being mined within their countries to the local countries. In response, these companies began a process of simply abandoning the mines. I was there in Jamaica in 1984 when Alcoa shut down it's last plant, literally closing the doors in the middle of the night and all of the managers flew off the island on a chartered flight. When the workers showed up in the morning, the place was locked and there was not a single manager to be found. The income from the Bauxite tarriffs from that one plant represented more than 1/4 of the funding of the national government, which literally shut down for 2 weeks as they sought a solution. Because Alcoa had never trained ANY local personnel on managing and operating the mine, the government ended up having to hire (at some incredible rates) the same managers who had just flown out to come back in as consultants to teach them how to operate and manage the mining facilities. The anti-American sentiment on the island skyrocketed and I had my first experience of being embarrassed to be an American, who were widely seen as "greedy and unscrupulous."

This is the kind of international practice too many U.S. companies engage in, because $ are the bottom line.

As for a solution, I have no idea. Many of these companies are too far down on the product chain to be effectively boycotted or shamed. It's a little hard to boycott aluminum. So I don't know what the solution is. I'm not sure there is one.

[JimL]

Well I believe they do have to pay taxes in the countries they are located on. Both as a corporation, and real estate, and as an employer.

Huh, they don't even pay taxes here in the U.S. half the time for all their complaining.

[Sparko]

Huh, they don't even pay taxes here in the U.S. half the time for all their complaining.

Yes they do JimL

[EvoUK]

Well I believe they do have to pay taxes in the countries they are located on. Both as a corporation, and real estate, and as an employer.

[carpedm9587]

Yes they do JimL

Actually, I cannot speak to "half," but the statistics do support the observation that the 35% tax rate is not the effective tax rate for many businesses. A 2017 study of the 258 Fortune 500 companies that showed a profit in 2017 found the following for the eight years period preceeding the study:


Some industries are notoriously low:

Utilities (e.g. electricity providers) paid an eight-year tax rate averaging just 3 percent. Oil, gas and pipeline companies paid an average 11.2 percent rate. Telecommunications companies paid 11.5 percent, and Internet services companies paid an eight-year average of 15.6 percent

Retail and Healthcare tended to pay close to the 35% mark, presumably because they have less access to loopholes and the ability to squirrel money overseas.

(https://itep.org/wp-content/uploads/...dyfact2017.pdf)

All of that being said, I personally think the business tax rate should be zero, business should cease being treated as "people," and the taxes should be levied in a flat tax on individuals when they are acrued as income of ANY type (capital gains, dividends, salary, etc.).

[Cow Poke]

As for a solution, I have no idea.

Figgered.

[Mountain Man]

This would up to the local government to enforce, which I don't have a problem with in theory. The problem, I suspect, is that Haiti's government is happy to pocket the money and leave its citizens in poverty.

[Sparko]

they should have to comply with all local laws and regulations. That is up to the government of the island/country and up to them to make the laws and enforce them.

[carpedm9587]

Figgered.

That I cannot solve tthe problem does not mean we should turn a blind eye to it, or give it a "pass." It still needs to be highlighted so that, whenever/whever possible, people can make choices in line with the ethics of the companies whose products they use.

[carpedm9587]

they should have to comply with all local laws and regulations. That is up to the government of the island/country and up to them to make the laws and enforce them.

But when a company takes advantage of a developing country that lacks the knowledge of international law, legal norms in other countries, or the industry itself, something unethical is happening, IMO.

[Sparko]

That I cannot solve tthe problem does not mean we should turn a blind eye to it, or give it a "pass." It still needs to be highlighted so that, whenever/whever possible, people can make choices in line with the ethics of the companies whose products they use.

So you are saying that because the company's don't give back and help the community that the people live in squalor that equates to a hellhole?

13220539-mmmain.jpg