Mainly, it isn’t true. It implies that the thing that comes around is the thing that goes (went) around.
All Individuals are different. Thinking and valuation are personal, so no two individuals value or disvalue a thing the same.
Only Individuals can determine some equivalence between disparate goods or disparate acts. After all, individuals themselves are disparate humans and if value were not in the eye of the individual, how else could one individual exchange a book for the shirt or money of another individual? One values the book more than the shirt or money, and the other vice versa. This difference between them is what unites them in a brief moment of exchange. Thus, the economic exchange between individuals does not unite them despite their differences, but unites them due to their differences.1
If some wrong-doing occurs (the thing that goes around), then the victim may seek restitution or vengeance. That is, the victim seeks to balance the cost taken from him, but equivalence only occurs in the mind of an Individual. So one victim of an act may enact harsher conditions onto the villain than another victim would as each views the cost of some act of villainy different from one another.