Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

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.




> 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.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: