I understand the point he is making, but it's a blunderbuss. Specifically, it's Schumpeter's idea of creative destruction. I can see how that has some merits in a normally functioning market economy. But this isn't that.
Arguments are easy to make at the extremes.
No problem with hedge funds going under in a crisis like this. I don't see the purpose they serve anyway.
At the Main Street end of the discussion, I support helping small businesses get through this.
But there's a big grey area in between. Let them die is the sort of thing libertarian ideologues say. Sounds great on tv. But when you look at individual business ecosystems, with complex webs of relationships between them, it's more complicated.
Generally-speaking, I don't see the benefit in letting businesses die that might normally be functional. I hate the airlines, but I can see why they are valuable. They are big parts of a long supply chain. And I don't see that some magically better airlines would emerge as a result of the current ones dying.
You can perhaps treat government capital injections as infusions of equity, for sale later. But I don't see much value in the approach the guest is taking. Too broad brush to be useful.
| 