3 ms·
It's not "really shitty" to the owners of the medallions, the risk of a loss of the artificial monopoly should have been baked into the price from the start. T
by reitzensteinm 11y ago
It's not "really shitty" to the owners of the medallions, the risk of a loss of the artificial monopoly should have been baked into the price from the start.
That the prices got as high as they did indicates the confidence the owners had over the stability of their political situation, which I have no sympathy for.
- pzone 11y agoIn that case, then the medallions also include the value of owners being able to maintain their monopoly through lobbying efforts. Whether or not you have any sympathy for them, striking a deal is the best solution. (Other question: do you have any sympathy for poor people who are hurt a bit by a carbon tax? Elsewhere in this discussion people are arguing against the tax because it hurts the poor. I think it would be a bit weird to be sympathetic to poor people who are hurt a little by a policy decision, but unsympathetic to slightly less poor people who are hurt a lot by a policy decision.)
- reitzensteinm 11y agoI don't have sympathy for losses sustained via poor investment decisions. I have lost a small fortune in my life because of mistakes I've made, and I don't want or deserve sympathy for any of it. Losing is part of playing the game. Poor people just trying to get by (and this included me at many points in my life) are who we should be saving our empathy for. Not wannabe businessmen.