I'm talking about the vague implications the parent poster was making - the purposes of which weren't very clear, but which I interpreted as: "A) Money is worth less than it was, (so printing fake money is justified) B) But on the other hand maybe he was part of the propertied class (in which case it wouldn't be)". I was asking whether they had a moral compass.
Maybe because it sounds like a question on a 10th grade exam. It’s demanding and didactic, both in framing the question and the form of the expected answer.
