@jessespafford saving) are deserved in a way that one cannot say of helicopter drops. I'd argue there's a difference.
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
Replying to @jessespafford
@jessespafford was - Ah, but couldn't we contract in to helicopter drops? My point is contracting in to helicopter drops doesn't seem to be1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
@jessespafford sufficient to solve problem of desert, precisely because helicopter drops are morally arbitrary in a way that1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
@jessespafford saving/borrowing are not. Basically, the point about contracting in works to mitigate against unjustness of current system1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
@jessespafford ...but it doesn't follow that contracting in to helicopter drops mitigates against unjustness there (because system not fair1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
@jessespafford in the first place). Probably still not clear. Horribly difficult to explain in 140 character bites! :)1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@jessespafford I'm actually writing a piece about the objection you're making. I'll point you at it when it's done! :)
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.