Generally that’s the idea (and true sometimes, even in USA).
But not all USA bailouts go like that (via equity) tho.
(I agree the gov buying equity at price 0 if only there is any sense in keeping the business, either as essential or that it can function on it’s own.)
You’ve got dubious non-market loans & massive tax breaks too.
(I agree with this too, but the choice who to help & who not always seems paid for.)
handing money to the wealthy
It still keeps up the system that does that tho (at least) in sense that a business in non-essential infrastructure gets bailed out instead of going under & allowing “the free market competition” sort things - the thing they are always selling along with capitalism as an essential counterbalance/checks and balances to keep things fair.
Handing a fuck ton of wealth to the already wealthy and propping up market bubble behaviors feels like it might be a downside.
Selling a massive chunk of your company to the government isn’t something you want to happen, and definitely isn’t “handing money to the wealthy”
The existing shareholders definitely don’t come out on top in a bailout.
Generally that’s the idea (and true sometimes, even in USA).
But not all USA bailouts go like that (via equity) tho.
(I agree the gov buying equity at price 0 if only there is any sense in keeping the business, either as essential or that it can function on it’s own.)
You’ve got dubious non-market loans & massive tax breaks too.
(I agree with this too, but the choice who to help & who not always seems paid for.)
It still keeps up the system that does that tho (at least) in sense that a business in non-essential infrastructure gets bailed out instead of going under & allowing “the free market competition” sort things - the thing they are always selling along with capitalism as an essential counterbalance/checks and balances to keep things fair.
How about the previous shareholders, who somehow miraculously predicted the market?