4 ms·
Well, if you "don't count inflation", why stop there? Might as well count it in even more favorable ways. I wondered if there might be a good reason for it, bu
by johnnyworker 3y ago
Well, if you "don't count inflation", why stop there? Might as well count it in even more favorable ways.
I wondered if there might be a good reason for it, but you just snarkily rephrasing what I quoted tells me there probably isn't -- so it's a loss. Because inflation is not something you can just ignore, when I buy something with money I don't get asked if I want the money to be counted as 1980 money or whatever, it's always "now" money. If by the time the loans get paid back inflation ate up the profit, there is no profit, and the criticism of it socializing loss while keeping profits private remains valid.
- satvikpendem 3y agoMy point is that it doesn't matter if it's a profit or a small loss, because people think companies were simply given billions of dollars of free money. The fact that the US government was close to or did break even from bailouts dispels this notion. So there is no socialization of loss while keeping profits private, as the companies had to pay out what they took.
- johnnyworker 3y ago> My point is that it doesn't matter if it's a profit or a small loss, because people think companies were simply given billions of dollars of free money. You stated "The US government made a profit". You claimed that, in direct contradiction to what you quoted. Now you're shifting goalposts.
- satvikpendem 3y agoI just quoted the article. You're right, I should have quoted it fully but I didn't think it would get to this level of pedantry for a point that is not even necessarily related to the profit or loss of a bailout.