Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

What if, and this is crazy, tax payers don't want to invest in companies that didn't save for a rainy day and just let them go bankrupt?

Too big to fail was outrageous because it says big businesses rule the world, if you don't like it, suck it.



When we were talking about being shut down for 2 weeks, this position made some sense. There are lots of reasons a company might face a 2 week disruption of operations, and it's fair to say an inability to tolerate it represents some real and avoidable fragility.

We're now a month and a half in, and some states have committed to broad mandatory shutdowns for another month. "Our business becomes illegal through the end of Q2" is not the kind of rainy day businesses can be reasonably expected to plan for.


i'd buy that argument for small businesses (<~$10MM in revenue), but for larger businesses (>$100MM) in most industries, a 6-month operational cushion isn't usually onerous, especially given the advantageous cost of capital generally afforded large businesses already.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: