3 ms·
I absolutely hate myself for replying, but in this situation you gave, SBF may have used customer's money, but an oil/coal baron uses their own money. Even if
by ok_dad 4y ago
I absolutely hate myself for replying, but in this situation you gave, SBF may have used customer's money, but an oil/coal baron uses their own money.
Even if you consider billionaires to be a disgusting stain on society, like myself, there's still a difference between stealing money to spend on stuff (political donations or Lambo's) and spending money/stocks you legally made in a horrible, earth-killing industry.
I absolutely detest greed in all it's forms, but I also don't think people should lower their morals and ethics to match the lowest of the low, as if they're Robin Hood (the character, not the company).
- vkou 4y agoThat just makes SBF a thief, but that's not really relevant to the core problem of pay-to-play campaign contributions.
- ok_dad 4y agoThe parent comment was asking what the difference was, I said the difference was the theft. I guess I was wrong because I looked up the right wind conspiracies and they all seem to care only about the part to play aspects, which is definitely very ironic considering the history of right wing financing.