Quote:
Originally Posted by BoLevi
Mckesson is a multinational corporation which distributes drugs. That's all it doesn. Delivers drugs from one party to another party. It does so with tiny profit margins. Let's call the revenue $308 billion per year. It's cash flow is about $3.6 billion. You could say it accumulated about 1% of the "capital" that flowed through the company. What happened to the other 99% that was not accumulated? It paid employees, paid suppliers for drugs (paying their employees), etc. Your trickle down theory suggests that the $3.6 billion is the most relevant portion of the capital flow. But that should, on its surface, be an absurd claim to make. This is the same with any profitable business.
|
Did you forget about all of the fixed assets that were acquired with some of that money?
Quote:
|
Frankly, it's envy disrupting your ability to see what should be obvious to you, which is understandable. It's not exactly intellectually elevated, though.
|
You’re really laying it on thick here. Low-mid wage employees at these types of companies have to invest most of their income on things like rent, food, transportation, etc just to keep themselves alive so those businesses can profit from their labour. Those expenses contribute to even more tax being collected from their income above what they’ve already paid.
Their at best in the low thousands total dollar value profit margin on their accumulated capital may be slightly higher than the billion dollar total value profit margin dividends paid out to a small number of shareholders who could also have even more money coming from investment in numerous other companies. That much is true, but you’re not explaining why you believe that it’s envy causing someone to suggests it’s still problematic as opposed to simply calling bull#### bull####.