6 ms·
> I believe this situation shows a basic divide between conservative and liberal viewpoints where conservatives look at this situation and believe it's only inv
by edanm 8y ago
> I believe this situation shows a basic divide between conservative and liberal viewpoints where conservatives look at this situation and believe it's only involving the shareholders and execs making the agreement where liberals look at it and see it as agreement between two people that is affecting everyone around them and society.
I'd probably call it more a difference between a libertarian viewpoint than a conservative one.
And IMO, as soon as you stipulate that they are "making the losses public when society has to come in and help support the safety net for a bunch of employees who just got shafted.", then you'll probably get agreement from most libertarians that this is a lose lose situation. And I tend to agree - if the government is bailing companies out, it can definitely impose conditions on it.
- lovich 8y agoThe bailing the company out here that I see is needing to provide benefits to the regular employees now, because as a society we have decided to not let people just die in the streets. When the executives make choices that require giving more benefits to many people, so that they can keep their high pay in spite of their own mistakes, I see that as making the costs public and profits private. It does not need to be the government handing out cash as a bailout to companies before the costs are becoming a public cost