And who works at these banks, automakers, airlines, etc.??? Not regular middle class people?
Would you rather have all these companies fail, lay off hundreds of thousands (millions?) of employees, who would then draw even more from the government in unemployment benefits than the money used to keep these businesses afloat - and yet still lose their homes? Think about the secondary effect of all major automakers going under - how many suppliers and service providers will they drag down with them???
And you know who would still be just fine in that terrible situation? The billionaires that you are so obsessed with. You are basically advocating for hurting an enormous number of regular working families just to make the billionaires feel some light toothache. Maybe.
To top this enormous stupidity off, these are all public companies. There is no billionaire who controls Ford, GM, Stellantis, Delta or American Airlines. They all belong to multiple shareholders - not least of which are 401k and pension funds. Again, impacting regular working people in completely unrelated industries.
Payroll taxes are earned by the employed, paid by the employed. Corporations provide the accountant.
Profits are not socialized if govt and tax pool did not gain shares. Loans below market, grants, equity (short and long) and discount sales occur. Difference matters. Generalizing over cases to win a minor point as of it applies to the whole original complaint is a straw man.
The payroll taxes aren't earned by the employed if the employed isn't actually employed, since the company they worked for went bankrupt.
If that's the argument you want to use for what socializing profits means, you also surely have to agree that socializing the losses would mean the taxpayer was worse if than without it, which is what everyone here seems to be implying.
The taxpayer didn't lose money on the bailouts themselves (possibly barely if inflation adjusted), the important part is that if the bailouts didn't happen, the taxpayer would've lost so much more.
The US just kind of works like this. Reckless growth that sometimes results in disaster. We're much more conservative here in the EU, which yes does avoid these kinds of situations but also heavily impedes growth. Which of these options is better is another conversation, but in the long run, it seems to be working pretty well for the US.
You’ve inverted my argument to make your point. I didn’t say that socialization should be what happens generally. Read it again. I clarified the asymmetries in financial favor which is OPs point and you seem structurally intent to misunderstand.
Your base philosophy is the problem and it’s motivating your reasoning. I’m certain you wouldn’t convince me to change my view, nor OP’s. I’ve thought through this numerous times and know where this it’s going and how you will circle.
My layover has ended. Last word to you should you take it.
4
u/Sensitive-Cat-6069 6h ago
And who works at these banks, automakers, airlines, etc.??? Not regular middle class people?
Would you rather have all these companies fail, lay off hundreds of thousands (millions?) of employees, who would then draw even more from the government in unemployment benefits than the money used to keep these businesses afloat - and yet still lose their homes? Think about the secondary effect of all major automakers going under - how many suppliers and service providers will they drag down with them???
And you know who would still be just fine in that terrible situation? The billionaires that you are so obsessed with. You are basically advocating for hurting an enormous number of regular working families just to make the billionaires feel some light toothache. Maybe.
To top this enormous stupidity off, these are all public companies. There is no billionaire who controls Ford, GM, Stellantis, Delta or American Airlines. They all belong to multiple shareholders - not least of which are 401k and pension funds. Again, impacting regular working people in completely unrelated industries.
Just a completely, utterly stupid rage bait. Wow.