Why tech giants don't invest tax cuts in American jobs: Don Pittis

More than $100 billion US in tax cuts that were supposed to "make America great again" went into the pockets of well-off investors in U.S. tech companies, according to new research by one of the world's most influential business newspapers.

Just as tech share prices show signs of weakness, there are growing worries that instead of investing those tax breaks into something that would last, much ofthat cash has just beengambled on what economist John Maynard Keynes described as casino capitalism.

"When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done," Keynes wrote in his groundbreaking 1936 opus,The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money.

Markets run amok

Canadian Keynes scholar Louis-Philippe Rochonis sure that when Americans look back at the tax money removed from public revenue and used for the sole purposeof creating a temporary jump in share prices, there will be profound regret.

"We live in an era of capitalism gone amok," says Rochon, an economicsprofessor at Laurentian University in Sudbury, Ont., and a founding editor of the Review of Keynesian Economics. In casino capitalism, he says, "What goes up must come down."

Certainly if shares were to continue their recent declines, all that money removed from government revenue and used to bid up stocks using share buybacks and dividend paymentscould simply disappear into thin air. Meanwhile, taxpayers will be left with a bigger national debt and increased calls for cuts to public spending to balance the budget.

As Keynes observed, the purpose of capitalist marketsis not to make a fortune in a matter of weeks or months on stock speculation, but instead to raise money for wise and productive investment in the economy.

And that was exactly what was supposed to happen with the tax cuts.

As sold to the American public, givingthe tech giants a tax break would encourage them tobring their money home from overseas tax shelters and allow them to invest in the U.S.

Instead of making iPhonesin China, for instance, Apple could spend the money on the research and the machinery to create North American jobs.

While the U.S. might have had trouble competing on wages, even companies in China are automating their factories. According to PresidentDonald Trump's MAGA rationale, there is no reason why those factories, the new technology to run them, and the high-paying jobs to make it all happen could not be located in the U.S. instead of China.

In fact, the name of the bill said it all. When the tax-cutting legislation was presented to Congress at the end of last yearit was introduced as theTax Cuts and Jobs Act.

Yet, despite the plunging U.S. unemployment rate,jobs continue to go abroad while investors get rich on speculation.

'Good for shareholders'

"Most companies are using cash to buy back stock and make acquisitions, rather than invest in new facilities,"Allianzinvestmentmanager Walter Pricetold the Financial Times."I think this is good for shareholders and management."

In theory, the money that goes to buybackscould eventually return to the economy, and certainly some of it does. For example, shareholders might sell their stocks and spend the money on restaurant meals,recirculating the cash into the economy. Or they could take the money and use it to hire people fora startup business.

Failureto invest in the future

But according to Rochon, in a "financialized" economyneither of those things tend to happen. The very rich who own most of the stock don't circulate much of their wealth into the real economy. And when they sell shares, rather than investing in something entrepreneurial,they tend to use the money to buy some other financial investment in hope of further speculative returns.

Rochon says short-termism compounds the problem. Rather than waiting for a long-term investmentto pay off at fiveto sevenper cent a year, shareholders and managerswho are paid bonuses tied to their stock price want to see shares rise now. Share buybacks solve that dilemma.

"These companies are going to have a problem," he says. "We're going to see old technology, the need for reinvestment, and we're going to look back and say, 'We should have invested 20 years ago instead of buying back.'"

What applies to the individual companies applies to the wider economy as well. Failure by the private sector to invest in new U.S. technology, new U.S. plants, new robots and new jobs will mean the U.S. will find it harder to compete with global challengers, including China.

And any of the buybackmoney that disappears as share prices fallmight just as well have been left in the public purse to invest in things like infrastructure and health care and education for the poorest things that really could make America great again.

Follow Don on Twitter @don_pittis