I hate it when governments tell companies "you didn't made a profit like you imagined you would?
Here is the money you would have made anyway" and just help them out. And the sick and horrible thing is, people, I mean literally humans, getting money because they need to survive from the government and companies (well CEO's) say that why should public get money individually when company doesn't?
They keep saying that if they do not, they would bankrupt, I am sorry but what type of company bankrupts after few months of not working? Have they never invested or saved a single cent in that company?
Are they spending more than they are making every single day? If you run a business that can't stop for 3 months, you deserve to be bankrupted, and if you think people and companies are equally important to save, you are a sicko as well.
Yeah the British government did something like if the main owner was a billionaire, the company had to turn to private investors to bail it out instead - which I think was a good idea. But they could even have reduced it a bit more. If you're not able to sell your companies bonds on the public market, you're probably not good at managing your company.
The US government aren't great at controlling their budget. Afaik they also gave lots of money in grants to some people (musk got $500k) and Google were founded fromggovernment grants. Now these should really have been loans, I'm not saying they shouldn't have been a thing, but they must've given them to tons of people.
If anyone doesn't have three months worth of expenses then they really should've been taken to court if they had a company as imo here that probably counts as fraud. A lot of companies that survive off continuously taking out loans do so but normally hold a years' worth of capital to pay off the debt if something happens.
