3 ms·
Why is it not? For example, people might have been making plans based on the expectation that it would be in effect.
by markbnj 9y ago
Why is it not? For example, people might have been making plans based on the expectation that it would be in effect.
- pbreit 9y agoBecause the program has never existed in the entire US history. For all we know it could have made things worse.
- burkaman 9y agoIf one company tries to acquire another but the purchase is blocked by the government, would you consider that a blow to either company?
- thehardsphere 9y agoYes.
- burkaman 9y agoEven though we can't know what the result would have been? Many mergers and acquisitions turn out to be huge mistakes.
- thehardsphere 9y agoThe government stopping an entirely consensual act between two people or organizations is a blow to those people, because they aren't being allowed to do whatever it is that they otherwise wanted. Whether it would have been a mistake or not is their problem and part of doing business. You wouldn't use this same logic for actual people, would you? Two people may have sexual intercourse; many acts of intercourse lead to unwanted pregnancy and AIDS, so we should deem these people "unharmed" if the government denies them the opportunity to have sex?
- burkaman 9y agoNo, sorry, it was sort of a rhetorical question. You said a little earlier that you don't consider cancelling this rule to be a blow since it might have been harmful, and I thought this was an analogous situation. The government is stopping consensual acts between investors and entrepreneurs.
- thehardsphere 9y agoRight. I think it is a "blow" in the sense that the companies expended time and effort preparing for this rule change. I don't know whether it is a "blow" in any way beyond that.
- markbnj 9y agoThe point is there isn't like a formal definition of "a blow" that you can resort to. It can be "a blow" for any number of reasons, and it doesn't take a ton of imagination to conjure a few.
- happyrock 9y agoWhy is that any concern of the US government? They are under no obligation to ensure convenience or expediency for citizens of other countries.