4 ms·

You’ve got the incentives wrong here: if 5G was harmful, then telecom executives would not roll it out, because they and their families could not avoid it if th

You’ve got the incentives wrong here: if 5G was harmful, then telecom executives would not roll it out, because they and their families could not avoid it if they did. This is similar to why smog and particulate air pollution got improved: because car and energy executives have to breathe air too.

jeremyjh 7y ago
You are right. This is also why the threat of global warming was nipped in the bud by thoughtful energy company executives. Their children have to live on earth too.
- snowwrestler 7y ago
  This is a fair shot and a strong counterexample.
- frabrun 7y ago
  This is one of the strongest arguments against climate alarmism. If the science itself was really so one-sided (and not just the government funded studies) the CEOs and other elites who hire their own experts wouldn't still be flying around in their private jets and running oil companies while pushing climate austerity on ordinary people. On the other hand, the big tobacco co executives all smoked prodigiously.
house9-2 7y ago
> This is similar to why smog and particulate air pollution got improved: Pretty sure it was do to legislation not the good will of executives. Greed is a hell of a drug. - https://www.marketplace.org/2014/07/14/la-smog-battle-against-air-pollution/ https://www.marketplace.org/2014/07/14/la-smog-battle-agains...
- tomohawk 7y ago
  Perfect can be the enemy of good. At least on the east coast, smog was improved considerably when the coal plants were finally allowed to update to newer tech. The owners had wanted to update their plants for several years, but the EPA was preventing them from doing that unless they met an unrealistic target. So the plants continued to unnecessarily spew pollution because of the standoff. The EPA was finally overruled and the updates got the coal plants to about 95% of what the EPA wanted.
jazzyjackson 7y ago
I'm 99% sure it wasn't energy executives that lobbied for the clean air act and on second read I feel like you might be being sarcastic

jeremyjh 7y ago

You are right. This is also why the threat of global warming was nipped in the bud by thoughtful energy company executives. Their children have to live on earth too.

snowwrestler 7y ago
This is a fair shot and a strong counterexample.
frabrun 7y ago
This is one of the strongest arguments against climate alarmism. If the science itself was really so one-sided (and not just the government funded studies) the CEOs and other elites who hire their own experts wouldn't still be flying around in their private jets and running oil companies while pushing climate austerity on ordinary people. On the other hand, the big tobacco co executives all smoked prodigiously.

house9-2 7y ago

> This is similar to why smog and particulate air pollution got improved: Pretty sure it was do to legislation not the good will of executives. Greed is a hell of a drug. - https://www.marketplace.org/2014/07/14/la-smog-battle-against-air-pollution/ https://www.marketplace.org/2014/07/14/la-smog-battle-agains...

tomohawk 7y ago
Perfect can be the enemy of good. At least on the east coast, smog was improved considerably when the coal plants were finally allowed to update to newer tech. The owners had wanted to update their plants for several years, but the EPA was preventing them from doing that unless they met an unrealistic target. So the plants continued to unnecessarily spew pollution because of the standoff. The EPA was finally overruled and the updates got the coal plants to about 95% of what the EPA wanted.

jazzyjackson 7y ago

I'm 99% sure it wasn't energy executives that lobbied for the clean air act and on second read I feel like you might be being sarcastic