Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
I see the "both for the common good" argument, but find that unpursuasive because you can make that argument for nearly everything. Hell, it can be argued that the nazi experiments were for the common good.
I think the indirect/direct payment distinction is cleaner and far more defensible. You are "robbing" from on and giving directly to "others."
|
You are making a distinction without meaning. Or alternatively, how is taking an additional dollar from me and spending it on a new plane that I think is unnecessary for my safety and defense, but which you believe is necessary for your safety and defense (because we evaluate and rank those risks differently) NOT robbing from me and giving directly to you?
