Even without capitalism, even without money at all, if you want your day job to continue to be "making movies" then there is an incentive to cheat the numbers.
And it's not really 'tax payers' that pay the bill here, it's 'stock owners'. There's no reason to bail out a movie company.
> Even without capitalism, even without money at all, if you want your day job to continue to be "making movies" then there is an incentive to cheat the numbers.
One probably shouldn't be 'making movies' if fake sales are necessary because nobody wants to watch.
> And it's not really 'tax payers' that pay the bill here, it's 'stock owners'. There's no reason to bail out a movie company.
I don't know how it works in China, but often in the U.S., when people put their life savings into junk bonds (or an overly risky house mortgage) that inevitably go bust, they declare banckruptcy and ultimately tax debt is forgiven or severely cut, or tex revenues are funneled to them in the form of wellfare to help them stay afloat. So, yes, when a commercial entity fails for whatever reason (even criminally bad decisions), the tax payers are the ones left paying for the social safety net to keep the afloat.
And it's not really 'tax payers' that pay the bill here, it's 'stock owners'. There's no reason to bail out a movie company.