Government stimulus works better funding construction than handing out cash. A $1,000 check gets spent on imports and disappears. Building bridges creates lasting assets. But the sudden flood of projects caused material and labor shortages, forcing companies to break contracts and go bankrupt.
Chapters
But the main thing that happened was all governments stimulated economies somehow, tried to. And the smarter governments stimulated construction because if you stimulate— this is my opinion only, right? If you stimulate and we give everyone $1,000, I think the US in some states did do that, right? It's not great. You give you $1,000 and then someone spends it, they're probably going to spend it on a TV or something. And that's going straight out of the US. The money is going out of the US. Whereas if they stimulate projects and economies and build bridges and stuff, at least you're left with the end product, which is a new bridge. So it helps the economy overall. And so the government did stimulate a lot of construction, which meant there was loads of projects. And so there was loads of projects, people won projects, and then they won lump sum projects. And then guess what happened? Couldn't get materials, couldn't get people, couldn't deliver on the projects. And that's how we've had a lot of these companies going out of business because they can't deliver. They can't do what they said they were going to do, and it's coming back to bite them.