• Log In
  • Sign Up
    • I know what I want the answer to be, but does the reality of the current economic environment preclude Corporate means testing, whether they paid taxes, or whether they were guilty of wrongdoing in the past five years (Wells Fargo, for example)?

    • Automation has reduced the number of employees required that Amazon replaced a million bookstore employees with 50,000 workers (heard this on npr several years ago, no receipts). So paying the laid off workers their full salaries until they got new jobs paying similar or better, and letting the company file for bankruptcy, could be a much cheaper option. And if there are sufficient tax-paying competitors to meet demand, or to take over the bankrupt company, why not? During the post 9/11 financial crisis, big banks were allowed to gobble up the small banks that were failing instead of bailing them out.

    • Of course, but a business that goes bust won’t be rehiring after the crisis is over. I’m not generally in favour of business bailouts, but these are exceptional times.

    • Well it’s a moot point since a deal was struck around midnight. One bright spot was the oversight required of all loans and a prohibition on stock buybacks.

      The hardest-fought concessions were related to the $500 billion aid fund for distressed businesses, which would include $425 billion for the Federal Reserve to leverage for loans to help broad groups of distressed companies and $75 billion for industry-specific loans to airlines and other hard-hit sectors.

      Democrats insisted on stricter oversight, in the form of an inspector general and a five-person panel appointed by Congress. Republicans also agreed to require companies that accepted money through the fund to halt any stock buybacks for as long as they were receiving government assistance, plus an additional year.