*The USA is an obvious exception where for at least a substantial group of people, the purpose is to keep the businesses intact. They really couldn't care less about the employees.
By bailing out the small business owners, you have a better chance at maintaining employment or for employment to re-emerge after a crisis.
Small business ownership is also a huge source of middle class wealth here in the US. Bailing out small business is essentially bailing out 30 million owner/employers and preserving their middle class wealth.
Obviously big businesses get bailouts here as well, and I happen to agree that if they use money for buy backs, dividends, etc. they should not get stimulus money.
But yes really small businesses employ about a fifth of the population.
Why is the goal to maintain employment? Seems like the government wants to keep people on their little hamster wheels.
Well, common sense seems to suggest that we would want to have an operational economy again at some point. That generally requires there to be jobs available to people.
What is the alternative to "their little hamster wheels", exactly?
To accomplish that, they only need to deposit money into people’s bank account. No employer middleman is required.
Tax avoidance also tends to be on profits. A lot of companies in the US have done corporate inversions, but they're still paying local payroll, property, and sales taxes. Freezing dividends and buybacks punishes the people who benefited from the tax avoidance, but you have to be careful not to do this at the expense of workers.
The other argument, and this is from a US perspective, is you're pushing 20% unemployment, why are you wasting your time promoting your political passion project? Spend the money, ask questions later.