Is it not true that in business, the basic principle is that if you are providing a service which is of value to others, you will have customers, your earnings will outweigh your costs and you will make a profit. With that profit, you can grow your business to gain more customers and further increase your profits. The profits are used to reward those who work for you in the form of salaries, and those who invested earlier on, seeing the potential that your business could and did achieve.
Now if this is true, why is it that all over the world governments are bailing out businesses that have gone off course and have found themselves unable to have higher earnings than expenditures and unable to function as a business any longer? Why do they insist on propping up these unprofitable and badly run organizations? Yes, yes, there are all the jobs of the employees to consider. But by maintaining businesses using bailout cash, you are just paying for staff costs, the last part of the cycle of business, without any of the other, vital, preceding stages being present. This creates an artificial “business” which is better described as an “organziation” than a true business.
This is exactly what happened in the dying days of the Soviet Union, and look what that got them. People say that it is “irresponsible” to let big businesses fail, because they are simply “too big” to fail. Well they sure as hell may be big, but they have failed. Let them die peacefully without prolonging their lives by agonizing artificial means, which are destined only to damage the wider economy of the nation itself more in the longer term than a short term loss of jobs.
What is truly irresponsible is not regulating the businesses earlier on when their profits were sky-high, and preventing them from becoming over-inflated unproductive collections of mere worker units. That was the irresponsible action, that was where the failure started, and because of a lack of will to reign in excesses of the good (albeit debt-fuelled) times, most probably because of certain side-benefits to the governments in question, this is the commupance that we reap now.
