News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The McNamara fallacy: Measurement is not understanding by TheOtherHobbes on Tuesday February 01, 2022 @08:21PM (#30172267)
The reality is that this kind of stupidity is built into accounting systems. It's not even the people with the spreadsheets. They're doing what they've been taught to do. It just happens to be completely wrong-headed - if you're interested in tangible long term growth and not quarterly plunder which moves money around without seeding genuine real value.

Which is why companies can "grow" in accounting terms while actually being hollowed out as going concerns with a future.

Likewise with the planetary economy, which appears to be growing financially while in ecological terms it's almost literally eating its own seed corn.

A better approach needs a revolution in accounting. Current accounting practices are built on so many false assumptions they cannot possibly produce lasting long term opportunity, except for a tiny minority of exceptionally and unhealthily privileged people.

Re:The McNamara fallacy: Measurement is not understanding by mahkeiro on Wednesday February 02, 2022 @03:01AM (#30174960)
Just look at Intel to see a company that was managed by the accounting people. Great numbers for a few years, large dividend, etc, but now they have to spend billions and billions to put the company back on track and give it a future.
Re:The McNamara fallacy: Measurement is not understanding by erosenbe0 on Wednesday February 02, 2022 @04:45AM (#30175555)
Disagree. Intel has had continuous dividends for at least 30 years.

Few giant American companies have been as consistently successful as Intel. I can think of only Microsoft, one or two energy conglomerates like ExxonMobil, a telecom or two like Verizon, and maybe a bank like Goldman Sachs.

Re:The McNamara fallacy: Measurement is not understanding by projektfu on Wednesday February 02, 2022 @08:05AM (#30176925)
Abbott Labs, CR Bard, Deere & Co.

Something about staying in your lane while increasing opportunities in that lane seems to be a good long-term formula.

Re:The McNamara fallacy: Measurement is not understanding by erosenbe0 on Wednesday February 02, 2022 @09:58AM (#30178416)
Yep, Bard is part of BD, which is a large beast. Abbott/Abbvie always has something going for them. UnitedHealth has done well for years and years as it has grown. There might also be a stable industrial I am forgetting like a chemical company or 3M.

But overall, giant companies with 30 year runs of knockout growth and/or dividends like Intel are Cinderella stories. Google will be the next one to qualify in a few years I suppose.

Re:The McNamara fallacy: Measurement is not understanding by mahkeiro on Wednesday February 02, 2022 @03:43PM (#30183763)
Sorry should have been more precise but I was also counting in the very large stock buyback that came to a end in early 2021.