3 ms·
> If Adam provides an opportunity for his investors to make their “ten billion,” why would anyone object to his self-dealing? On the other hand, why would anyo
by jakelazaroff 7y ago
> If Adam provides an opportunity for his investors to make their “ten billion,” why would anyone object to his self-dealing?
On the other hand, why would anyone care whether or not his investors make their “ten billion”?
We object because it’s a you-scratch-our-back-we-scratch-yours situation in which the rich get richer and no value is produced for the rest of society.
- braythwayt 7y agoWell, that is certainly a valid position to take, and I am not unsympathetic. But my parent comment was responding to the question of whether this specific behaviour is illegal. Your take touches on whether the entire industry—with or without a few leasebacks and trademark deals—is morally repugnant.
- jakelazaroff 7y agoFair enough. I also think there’s some pattern matching going on, since shuffling money around like this is often indicative of something illegal. But you’re right, this particular case seems to be in the clear.