[throwawaysea]

GP is making the point that in this case, the government caused the insolvency of these businesses in significant part through authoritarian closures, not through the irresponsibility of those running the business. Therefore the government (taxpayers) owe them recompense to make them whole.

[anonuser123456]

A virus is no more the governments fault than an asteroid. The shutdown is consequence of the disaster, not a cause.

Economic activity would decline substantially regardless of government action.

[grey-area]

The global shutdown is causing an economic disaster on a scale not seen since 1929.

[twblalock]

The shutdown is the government’s fault, period. The damage it is causing is far worse than what would have happened if the government had started taking action in January and ramped up testing capacity. Instead the government did close to nothing and now the lockdowns are the last resort.

Other countries handled this better. South Korea and Taiwan are good examples of countries that ramped up testing and did not need to shut down society.

Shutdowns are not inevitable. They are a result of government failure, and the government should compensate businesses that it orders to shut down.

[tracer4201]

Disagree. There’s no guarantee earlier government action would have eliminated the need to shut down businesses or ban gatherings. I do think more should be done to support workers. $1200 single payments are not even peanuts.

[twblalock]

We know for a fact that some countries didn't need to shut down. Again, South Korea and Taiwan are examples. They are also denser than the United States, and less wealthy, and closer to the source of the virus outbreak. Yet they handled it much better.

By contrast, the United States is less dense than those countries, significantly farther away from China, the richest country in the world, and had months to prepare.

I find it unconvincing that the United States could not have rolled out broad testing and tracing if it had started back in January when the virus was known to be a threat. Even if you're right and all it did was buy time before an inevitable shutdown, shortening the shutdown would have hugely helped to limit the economic damage.

[tracer4201]

I don’t agree with this perspective. The cost of keeping bars open, for instance, is much higher on society as a whole because of how it would lead to the virus spreading. I don’t see how that makes the public responsible to help these businesses.

When your business does well, you reap the benefits, not me. The belief is you’re entitled to it, because you’re the one who took the risk. So how is it now that we allow you to risk public safety or otherwise we take on the risk and give you grants or cheap loans?

[AnimalMuppet]

Sure, but if I own a bar, and I shut it down as part of stopping the plague, and the plague stops but I go bankrupt, you reap the benefit, not me.