3 ms·
the shares are owned by real people. it's not totally different from the situation where the government wants to build a train track through where your house c
by leetcrew 7y ago
the shares are owned by real people.
it's not totally different from the situation where the government wants to build a train track through where your house currently sits. the train line will connect two important cities and allow for lots of people to commute with less emissions. it's a great thing, but the government is still obligated to pay you for the house it's about to bulldoze.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- kortilla 7y agoIt is in the US. If your ideal model of government is something like China, the concept of the right thing for the people still requiring compensation to the disrupted individuals is pretty foreign.
- leetcrew 7y agoone of many reasons I prefer to live here.
- jariel 7y ago"it's not totally different from the situation where the government wants to build a train track through where your house currently sits." It's not at all similar to eminent domain. A better parallel would be the military 'draft'. Does the US government pay soldiers enough to truly consider the violence they will face? What would the 'going market rate' be for soldiers in such a situation? And yet somehow people do it for relatively low pay? I wonder why? Hmmm ... maybe because there's something more than 'private property' at stake? This is not a situation wherein government action to ostensibly benefit the many, causes minor economic injury to a few or even one. This is a situation wherein the entire game is up for grabs, there are lives at stake, and everyone is 'all in'.