<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: 88	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://grundlinien.de/en/88/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://grundlinien.de/en/88/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2026 10:51:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Hegel (Simple)		</title>
		<link>https://grundlinien.de/en/88/#comment-3528</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hegel (Simple)]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2026 10:51:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://grundlinien.de/?p=4767#comment-3528</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[§ 88: How fraud works

When I buy something, I want two things. I want this particular thing. And I want it at its value. Also, it should really belong to the one who sells it to me.

This is exactly where fraud strikes.

An example: Someone sells an old horse. Beforehand, he has filed down its teeth so that it looks younger. The buyer looks the horse over. He takes it for a test ride. He agrees and pays.

What is correct about this?

Both agreed freely. It was about exactly this horse. So far, everything is in order.

What is missing?

The value is wrong. The horse is worth much less than the buyer believes. The seller has shown him a false semblance. Only this remains: This horse is this horse. The universal, the true value, has vanished from the deal.

Summary: In fraud, the deal looks correct from the outside. Both have agreed. But the value is missing because one deceived the other.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>§ 88: How fraud works</p>
<p>When I buy something, I want two things. I want this particular thing. And I want it at its value. Also, it should really belong to the one who sells it to me.</p>
<p>This is exactly where fraud strikes.</p>
<p>An example: Someone sells an old horse. Beforehand, he has filed down its teeth so that it looks younger. The buyer looks the horse over. He takes it for a test ride. He agrees and pays.</p>
<p>What is correct about this?</p>
<p>Both agreed freely. It was about exactly this horse. So far, everything is in order.</p>
<p>What is missing?</p>
<p>The value is wrong. The horse is worth much less than the buyer believes. The seller has shown him a false semblance. Only this remains: This horse is this horse. The universal, the true value, has vanished from the deal.</p>
<p>Summary: In fraud, the deal looks correct from the outside. Both have agreed. But the value is missing because one deceived the other.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
