Yes, of course one can make that argument and say that it was meant to stave off further reductions. I don't even know if this was a particularly bad way to do

Yes, of course one can make that argument and say that it was meant to stave off further reductions. I don't even know if this was a particularly bad way to do things, can't make the perfect the enemy of the good here. I do think that a bunch of this money ended up lining the coffers of businesses that had an "in" with a particular bank or a particularly tax person, just because that's the way these things end up working in practice. I would have preferred a much more stream-lined European approach combined with much more direct cash to consumers than this roundabout way of doing it, but I don't think it was entirely ill-intentioned. But when you start taking into account executive pay, etc, some of it can start looking pretty shady.