The number is off, but it doesn't matter. I think he was being hyperbolical, but we can consider the idea of bailout to people vs bailout to corporations anyway.
Give each family 60k, and you cover them for a year at the same cost of the bailout that actually occurred.
In that scenario....
Groceries get bought. Bills get paid. Essential businesses make money, which means they get compensated for being useful. That's a good thing.
Elderly employees who don't feel comfortable working, can quit their jobs.
We have grown so accustomed to rampant corporate feudalism that it almost feels un-American to question the collapse of companies that are not essential to the health and well-being of our citizens or our government. It feels wrong to allow the financial losses of a billionaire who knowingly bought a risk asset, only because we have been told for years that normal people need billionaires to create our jobs for us.
Let them take it in the face for once. Risks have a downside factor. We shouldn't eliminate that just because rich people want to maintain their riches.
Why not give everyone a UBI and let things shift towards strengthening necessities all the time? People who make less money have a higher Marginal Propensity to Consume necessities. That would correctly distribute what’s needed in society by actual level of need. It would also automatically adjust to shortages etc.
I think as entrepreneurs we can all say that investors put in $$ when they see demand for your products and services, and not because they got a tax break!
Give each family 60k, and you cover them for a year at the same cost of the bailout that actually occurred.
In that scenario....
Groceries get bought. Bills get paid. Essential businesses make money, which means they get compensated for being useful. That's a good thing.
Elderly employees who don't feel comfortable working, can quit their jobs.
We have grown so accustomed to rampant corporate feudalism that it almost feels un-American to question the collapse of companies that are not essential to the health and well-being of our citizens or our government. It feels wrong to allow the financial losses of a billionaire who knowingly bought a risk asset, only because we have been told for years that normal people need billionaires to create our jobs for us.
Let them take it in the face for once. Risks have a downside factor. We shouldn't eliminate that just because rich people want to maintain their riches.