82,891
edits
Look, I tried: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
Deep down, everyone will know that this fellow has not the faintest intention of ever asking about your employees’ personal investments. Once the {{t|contract}} is safely [[Wet signature|inked]] and put away, no one will give it another thought. Why would they? And what, even if they did, could they honestly expect to do about it? What, should it discover that your employees invest in exclusively in tobacco, arms and the financing of organised crime, would be its [[loss]]? | Deep down, everyone will know that this fellow has not the faintest intention of ever asking about your employees’ personal investments. Once the {{t|contract}} is safely [[Wet signature|inked]] and put away, no one will give it another thought. Why would they? And what, even if they did, could they honestly expect to do about it? What, should it discover that your employees invest in exclusively in tobacco, arms and the financing of organised crime, would be its [[loss]]? | ||
None. But that is not the point. What it wants is ''plausible deniability'', should any of its own clients ask what on earth it thought it was it is doing giving money to Fairfield Sentry, or how it is ensuring its counterparties are all feckless [[Virtue-signalling|virtue-signallers]]. It can say, “you see? It is in the contract! They promised!” | None. But that is not the point. What it wants is ''[[plausible deniability]]'', should any of its own clients ask what on earth it thought it was it is doing giving money to Fairfield Sentry, or how it is ensuring its counterparties are all feckless [[Virtue-signalling|virtue-signallers]]. It can say, “you see? It is in the contract! They promised!” | ||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||