3 ms·
It's not about moral equivalence, it's about likelihood of action. He's saying because the banks are structured a certain way, the government behaves different
by ameister14 14y ago
It's not about moral equivalence, it's about likelihood of action.
He's saying because the banks are structured a certain way, the government behaves differently than they would otherwise. Namely that the government feels it has a right to the goods/property of the citizenry that they did not have before. I disagree, because governments did things like this without the banks.
- burntsushi 14y ago> It's not about moral equivalence, it's about likelihood of action. It's about both. The top parent can't make this statement > They would have never gone to a farmer and taken 10% of their grain. without an assumption of moral equivalence.