> This an economic argument Yes that was precisely my point. Robbing Peter to pay Paul. As you say yourself, there's no basis to the "assumption" of nice rat

> This an economic argument Yes that was precisely my point. Robbing Peter to pay Paul. As you say yourself, there's no basis to the "assumption" of nice rational actors in a zero sum game within in a singular homogeneous society of little Bayesian utility maximisers - that's precisely the simplistic fantasy that's landed us in this damn awful mess. Some people get away with it. Some get screwed over. Hence I am questioning such moral arithmetic.