3 ms·
I think your analogy is 180 degrees out of phase. The obvious difference is that the government works for us, and our CEO doesn’t. That’s why they agreed to par
by lawnchair_larry 6y ago
I think your analogy is 180 degrees out of phase. The obvious difference is that the government works for us, and our CEO doesn’t. That’s why they agreed to part with a mutually agreeable sum of their cash - something they do not have to do. If one party fails in their obligations to make this transaction mutually beneficial, the rational counterparty will sever the relationship.
And yes, we fire the government all the time. We pay them, and if we don’t like their performance, they’re out. If they start publicly trashing us, they’re out even faster. This is why mayors have to appear meek and apologetic, instead of calling the voters a bunch of fools. Like when half of the population felt like Hillary called them a basket of deplorables, for example. Not many want to hire that person.
- jgwil2 6y agoAh, way to sneak some Hillary-bashing into a completely unrelated discussion. Friendly reminder that three million more people wanted to hire her than the other guy.
- lawnchair_larry 6y agoIf your takeaway from that comment was Hillary bashing, you missed the point.
- jgwil2 6y agoYou undermined your own point because you couldn't help but bring up a partisan political point from five years ago completely unnecessarily.