3 ms·
That needs to be rectified.
by throwaway2048 7y ago
That needs to be rectified.
- thereisnospork 7y agowhy? I'm not being glib here: Does the leak represent a meaningful increase over the background oil leak rate? Are any people being harmed by the leak? Is any endangered wildlife being harmed by the leak? Global warming being unduly exacerbated? Ultimately, does the human cost of leaving the leak outweigh the human cost of fixing the leak? Without the balance of probability putting the answer in the affirmative fixing the leak and not '"putting profit first"' is hurting people, not helping. edit: ordering