He's not wrong...

He's not wrong. If all the stimulus packages that Congress was throwing at Wall Street went to the average citizen instead, we likely wouldn't be seeing the wide scale economic collapse that we are right now. It's hilarious to me that people who can barely afford to put $10 a month away in savings are essentially being told they should have saved four months rent for these kind of situations - but the people WITH money are having their crocodile tears dried with $100 bills by the government. Let THEM prop themselves up. Take care of the little guy instead.

Attached: ghf.jpg (982x827, 143.05K)

I actually agree with this. It means all stimulus would be used in a way that doesn't distort natural incentives.

Reckless companies would fail while consumers buy what they actually want, and cautious companies would be rewarded since they're the only ones that can sell to those consumers.

If you give money to a rich person, he'll likely hoard it, but if you give money to a poor person he'll likely spend it. If you agree with this, which do you think improves the economy faster?

>which do you think improves the economy faster?
from their point of view? whatever kills all the plebs with as little fuss as possible

rich people do not hoard money... they invest it, that's how they stay rich and get even richer. poor dumbasses do spend it and that's how they stay poor.

investments improve economy, poor dumbasses don't.

What those on the right seem to forget is that states are corporations in their own right, and they are effectively employing their citizenry to uphold the state.
You can't have a non interventionist state, as it will always be undercut be bullshit merchants offering gibs in exchange for supporting their rise to power.
A minimally invasive state that is stable for a given population must still be able to undercut the offers made by other potential states in exchange for the people's support.
This ofc depends on the people themselves, as some people will, due to inherent disposition, place more value on liberty than others.

In some sense, you can view liberty as being inherently deflationary.
More unclaimed land means more options for the common man to put their liberty to use.
Once everything has been claimed, voluntary dissociation becomes impossible due to there being nowhere left to go, and the common man will find their liberty much less useful.
The common man can thus be more easily convinced to exchange their liberty for other goods that are increasing in value relative to it.
Liberty should be treated as a resource in it's own right, and it's value from the perspective of the common man should be seen as something that can vary in response to market forces just like any other resources, rather than being assumed as sacred.
If everyone unconditionally viewed liberty as sacred, there would be no need for political engagement for the purpose of upholding it.

All of this 100%. Bailouts incentivize reckless behavior within corporations. VW is a great example of this. They engaged in wanton reckless behavior and the brand should've died. Instead, the ECB bailed them out and they'll make similar mistakes in the future, most assuredly.

The rich "hoarding" wealth isn't exactly what you think it is. Nor are their "investments". The kind of investment that really drives the economy is investment in innovation (R&D), physical assets (like manufacturing hardware or computers), labor skills, and social responsibility. These actually drive our economy, in a fundamental way, because there are intangible benefits that don't go away during a downturn. The research doesn't evaporate, the newly skilled labor doesn't evaporate, and the 50 ton steel press doesn't evaporate. Compare this to "investing" in the 21st century. Investors speculate on the value of stocks (debt), and corporations use this debt not to buy anything or innovate, but instead to enrich the board with neetbux. It's literally just a cheatcode to get more numbers from one place to another place. Never mind the business itself, because that's tertiary at most.

I don't see the problem, they're gonna spend it and pump money back into the economy either way.

Attached: 17687687678.jpg (499x481, 27.94K)

investing is hoarding

This is how communism starts and fags like that brownie will hope to be the new commissars.