Hacker News Reader

Comment by austhrow743 | Hacker News Reader

>which one, knowing there is no bailout in the future, will plan better for emergencies like this one

The government making your business illegal for multiple months is not an emergency businesses should have expected, or be expected to expect.

>and run on even thinner margins and bigger stock price growth and dividends for the shareholders.

Thinner margins, stock price growth, and dividends for shareholders are all good things that we want more of not less.

It's also bullshit to call financial aid from the government, that's needed because of government action, a bail out. It's compensation.

View on HN

> Thinner margins, stock price growth, and dividends for shareholders are all good things that we want more of not less.

This isn't a recipe for a robust economy, it's a recipe to enrich the rich. You might want that, but the majority of the population is not benefitting from that. Employees benefit from robust companies who have some money saved up for a rainy day, and from wages that track cost of living. When a majority of workers are impoverished and can't afford a month without income, that's directly related to thinner margins and dividends for shareholders.

> It's also bullshit to call financial aid from the government, that's needed because of government action, a bail out.

No it’s not bullshit and it’s because of a pandemic mostly, very little because of government action. The government will make it legal again soon to open your business but many will still need aid for time to come because there will be less demand.

Will we be subsidising empty restaurants, hotels and airplanes for an entire year or more because it is not ‘their fault’?

Probably, because if we don't then we'll face a shortage when demand for those things rebounds.

It is true that current emergency is not the one to be expected. But it is made much worse for the people which depend on everything to come from the employer. If healthcare comes from a "job" - shouldn't the "job" anticipate pandemic in that case? Employers enjoy the benefits of employee's dependency during normal times, but the second things go sideways - they don't want to pay extra to guarantee medical coverage when it is needed the most.

I agree on your second point but this is a flip side of market economy that we have all subscribed to - there are good times and bad. If capitalism is the way to go, then companies that can't survive (for whatever reason) should go under. This pandemic and government decisions affect everyone equally. Lets put our money where our mouth is. Otherwise we should switch to socialism and call it a day.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com