• ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    loans collateralized on capital assets are treated as income under this model

    As soon as someone unironically suggests that loans should be considered income, under any circumstances, you can safely stop listening to their economics takes, lol.

      • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Billionaires do nothing different than anyone who takes out a HELOC on a house that appreciates in value at a rate higher than the LOC.

        No one “ruined” anything or “played games”, you’re just ignorant of what’s actually being done. If your collateral happens to be something that appreciates in value faster than your loan balance does, you can do the exact same thing.

        Small business loans are also all basically predicated on the exact same premise: “loan me this upfront money I need, and I can use it to make enough money to pay you back and then some”. The only difference is that I’m that case, the ‘thing that becomes more valuable’ is being created, it’s not something that exists already that’s growing in value.

        • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yeah no except they literally did ruin it for everyone else and play games. Billionaires use extremely low interest loans collateralized on capital assets as a means to get free money that allows them to throw their wealth around without ever having to either risk number go down or having to pay their due.

          We cannot allow billionaires to keep getting away with dodging what they owe because some people who frankly probably shouldn’t be in the small business gang anyways might have to gasp get a job!