Raghu writes: >> I was referring to your statement "every example of Subsidized Moral >> Hazard you identify (or could identify) is a product of the political >> process, not the market process." >> >> This reflects a failure to recognize that the poltical and market >> process are one and the same thing. It is misleading to pretend that >> they can somehow be separated.
I disagree. They are not one and the same thing. The only way you can say otherwise is definitional. If I sell my car to my neighbor, that is a conceptually different act than if I go to the voting booth to vote for a mayor. If you want to define them as the same thing, that is like saying there is no difference between dogs and cats because they both breathe oxygen. David Shemano
