I don't think that "privatize the wins, socialize the losses" fits the particular article, merely explaining the phrase itself. I think reidjs was replying to

I don't think that "privatize the wins, socialize the losses" fits the particular article, merely explaining the phrase itself. I think reidjs was replying to the NDizzle's comment by clarifying the saying, not arguing that it's the case here. I'm not entirely sure I follow NDizzle's initial argument, taken at face value I read their argument as the state government shouldn't interfere with local corruption because the state government because they allowed things like this to happen in the first place and they deserve it. And to be clear, I on my use of corruption here, I consider it corruption because apple gets a kickback for directing all the sales tax to Cupertino instead of to all the municipalities where the product is actually be sold to. If apple didn't get that kickback I wouldn't consider it corruption, just stupid tax laws.