I don't think these are small-minded beliefs at all. Owner/directors who've deliberately structured their tax affairs to pay de-minimis salary and take the rest as investment income can't then expect taxpayer support when their investment income dries up. They could have paid themselves entirely on payroll and had the same financial support via furlough as any other employee.
I do sympathise with the (many) who probably didn't pre-covid understand the difference, and even more sympathy with those who were acting on their accountants advice without having the difference explained to them. But a large proportion would have taken the tax savings even if they had been explained.
My answers
I don't think these are small-minded beliefs at all. Owner/directors who've deliberately structured their tax affairs to pay de-minimis salary and take the rest as investment income can't then expect taxpayer support when their investment income dries up. They could have paid themselves entirely on payroll and had the same financial support via furlough as any other employee.
I do sympathise with the (many) who probably didn't pre-covid understand the difference, and even more sympathy with those who were acting on their accountants advice without having the difference explained to them. But a large proportion would have taken the tax savings even if they had been explained.