Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

The Magistrate

(95,244 posts)
21. I Am Aware Of That, Sir
Wed Mar 25, 2020, 02:11 PM
Mar 2020

It is, however, a solid chunk of their expenses, and relieving them of it would make it easier to get private credit to deal with interest and debts. Firms that are going concerns should have no trouble doing this, and those which are not will simply be going to the wall sooner than otherwise, and with their employees, at least, retaining their income. Executive and boardroom salaries would of course have to go by the board, such people have a sufficient nest egg to see them through, and if they haven't managed that have no business managing a large firm.

Your attempt to switch the discussion from large firms to the smallest of the small fry is noted, and is not a tactic I have much respect for. There is entirely too much blurring where the meaning of words like 'property' and 'business owner' is concerned. When a man says he loves his wife, loves his daughter, and loves a good rare hamburger, he had better be meaning something different each time. That the same word is used for all three meanings may be taken to indicate our culture finds 'love' a confusing thing. This is not so deliberate, or of much use in disputation. But the confusion created by use of the word 'property' to indicate such varied things as a carpenter's tool-chest, a family's house, a factory employing several hundred persons, a sprawl of land extending several thousand acres, and paper certificates entitling their holder to a share in the proceeds of an enterprise he has never taken part in personally, or even seen, is deliberate, and intended to convince small-holders that their interests are identical with those of plutocrats and rentiers, which they are not.

A person who is sole owner of an enterprise which employs no one else is in no real sense the owner of a business, but actually a person scrounging for temporary employment, client by client, or else an employee in all but name of a larger concern he or she supplies with some article or service. They live, then, not on profit but on a wage, paid by their clients. This wage can be readily calculated by the tax documents they must file, and for purposes of my proposal would treated as any other employee's wage. Such people may require some extra protection from creditors in present circumstances, and ought to get it.



"It is nonesense to suppose something beneficial to the greater portion of society may be injurious to its whole."

Double edge sword jimfields33 Mar 2020 #1
They can file bankruptcy and remain in business. kentuck Mar 2020 #2
There will be massive job losses and we will enter a depression...Thanks God Congress understands Demsrule86 Mar 2020 #16
I suppose they could nationalize a few of them? kentuck Mar 2020 #19
Yep, nationalize a few of them and the rest will run for hills. Who are they going to put in charge Hoyt Mar 2020 #32
No they can't... Le'ts deal in the possible. Demsrule86 Mar 2020 #34
Have you thought about calling your Congress people? HarlanPepper Mar 2020 #3
Spot on gratuitous Mar 2020 #4
Schumer says Congress will provide oversight of the corporate giveaway Ponietz Mar 2020 #5
Sure it will! kentuck Mar 2020 #7
enjoy your economic hyperdepression Amishman Mar 2020 #6
Since you put it like that... kentuck Mar 2020 #8
the money needs to go out. It also needs controls to make sure it goes where it should and is repaid Amishman Mar 2020 #9
From my understsnding... kentuck Mar 2020 #11
It Would Probably Be Better, Sir The Magistrate Mar 2020 #14
payroll expenses are only a small part of the issue Amishman Mar 2020 #18
I Am Aware Of That, Sir The Magistrate Mar 2020 #21
Thanks for making the distinction between small businesses and large corporations, Sir. kentuck Mar 2020 #22
I Would Support Nationalization, Sir, Personally The Magistrate Mar 2020 #23
Yes Sir, it is not in most folks consciousness kentuck Mar 2020 #24
just pointing out where the logic fails, your excellency Amishman Mar 2020 #25
You Have Pointed To No Essential Difference, Sir The Magistrate Mar 2020 #27
All I can say is every damn Republican voted doc03 Mar 2020 #10
Definitely not corporations Bettie Mar 2020 #12
They had better read the small print.. kentuck Mar 2020 #13
Exactly. old guy Mar 2020 #31
Thousands of jobs are at stake...they should loans that have to be repaid with interest...just like Demsrule86 Mar 2020 #15
Yup, that's the way to do it. Turin_C3PO Mar 2020 #17
We are in agreement as always. Demsrule86 Mar 2020 #35
The thing is, most of these corporations are probably going to get this money and smirkymonkey Mar 2020 #20
They'll probably figure out how to avoid taxes, as well. Frustratedlady Mar 2020 #26
Perhaps they should get grants relative to the amount of taxes they have paid? kentuck Mar 2020 #28
Yes, that's basically what I started out to post, then got side-tracked. Frustratedlady Mar 2020 #29
I saw something on FB that reminded me. kentuck Mar 2020 #33
A corporation can issue stock to raise money. Quemado Mar 2020 #30
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»There is no reason to vot...»Reply #21