this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2025
1307 points (99.2% liked)

Bluesky

1735 readers
1428 users here now

People skeeting stuff.

Bluesky Social is a microblogging social platform being developed in conjunction with the decentralized AT Protocol. Previously invite-only, the flagship Beta app went public in February 2024. All are welcome!

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works -4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Selling a massive chunk of your company to the government isn't something you want to happen, and definitely isn't "handing money to the wealthy"

The existing shareholders definitely don't come out on top in a bailout.

[–] Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club 4 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

Generally that's the idea (and true sometimes, even in USA).

But not all USA bailouts go like that (via equity) tho.
(I agree the gov buying equity at price 0 if only there is any sense in keeping the business, either as essential or that it can function on it's own.)

You've got dubious non-market loans & massive tax breaks too.
(I agree with this too, but the choice who to help & who not always seems paid for.)

handing money to the wealthy

It still keeps up the system that does that tho (at least) in sense that a business in non-essential infrastructure gets bailed out instead of going under & allowing "the free market competition" sort things - the thing they are always selling along with capitalism as an essential counterbalance/checks and balances to keep things fair.

[–] zout@fedia.io 2 points 23 hours ago

How about the previous shareholders, who somehow miraculously predicted the market?