That doesn't mean all the circular financing won't be a problem, but people keep drawing the wrong conclusions from the negative earnings, which are relevant to investors but not so much to the viability of the business.
govt prints money (FED) -> government -> banks -> (economy) -> tax -> government
And the second "great circle"
govt loans money (FED) (money that doesn't exist, which isn't a problem if you can print money) -> banks -> (economy) -> loan repayment -> money gets "unprinted"/destroyed
Everything about the economy is a great circle. You will also understand after a while, if you wish for the economy to remain stable, this must be the case. You can't change it without either hyperinflation and extreme "capital flight" (between quotes because of course in that circumstances capital will run into gold or other physical resources), by either vastly overheating or stopping the economy.
And yes, most instances are of the overheating kind. The only case of stopping the economy was accidental (despite many warnings), in other words, yes, it was Republicans. But last time that happened, even republicans could decide to change course. Of course, only once huge damage was done.
The complaint isn’t that the economy is “circular”, how else could it work with 3 or more people engaged in commerce? Neither of those things get fixed on different ways to manage the money supply either, it’s not as if they didn’t have national debts or inflation while on the gold standard.
Keiretsu - perfectly acceptable business relationship preferences that in no way require governments to regulate their GDP growth / campaign donation black box machine.
Was that the one where they removed a bunch of big positions to make it positive (was it training cost, I forgot)?
They are cash flow positive, $3.4 billion in H1.
That means they're making money.