[–] 1121315? 1 point 9 points 10 points (+10|-1) ago
Do you blame the hooker for providing the service or the john for providing the demand for it? Or maybe they both deserve some blame. Problem is that so many blame the banks for everything and ignore that Greece could have decided not to spend so much at any time. Greece played the game and lost.
[–] FreeSpeachRocks [S] 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Good analogy.
Perhaps a better one is do we blame the addict or the pusher? Clearly the addict needs help getting over his addiction. We may or may not choose to help. The pusher, on the other hand, tends to be the scourge of society. Not particularly someone we want to associate with.
I guess if one hooker was doing an entire country on lay-away, and waited until she had a couple of hundred billion dollars owed her when she decided to abolish the lay-away plan and collect, then I suppose we might blame all those foolish, horny bastards who lined up for the cheap and easy ass.
You don't know how layaway works. In this case the john (Greece) came up on a layaway payment and did not have the money. This time the hooker (the banks) decided that they were not going to extend them any more because they finally realized the john wasn't going to pay up but was just going to keep coming for the sex and put it on layaway. Now the john wants to act like they deserve continual layaway without paying. Hooker probably should have never done the layaway but the john should have known if they could make the payments.
[–] donkeytron 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Short answer: he who has the gold makes the rules.
[–] Empire_of_the_mind 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
How unusual!