4 ms·

You are not obligated to buy anything you disapprove of

by oDot 6y ago

Shared404 6y ago
> We protect those who aren’t well versed in a topic through regulation for this reason. You're still missing the crux of the matter. You can't disapprove of something you don't know about. In addition (Slightly OT, but related), there are many people who do disapprove, but have to have access to a product/service in order to do their job. The only way to protect them is regulation.
- oDot 6y ago
  I get it -- beyond a certain point this sort of thing becomes fraud, which is already illegal. Regarding the job example -- the employer is also a human being, and if they want to get that TV they may. If you disapprove of that, you don't have to work there. Either way, best if you keep your private conversations out of the office.
  - Shared404 6y ago
    > I get it -- beyond a certain point this sort of thing becomes fraud, which is already illegal. True. I suppose that the people asking for more regulation (myself included in this instance) would mostly just like for those laws to actually have teeth in this sort of situation. Unfortunately, lawmakers/enforcers mostly fall in the "not knowing" category. Also, my apologies if I came across as overly combative, that was not my intention. > If you disapprove of that, you don't have to work there. Unfortunately, many people do not have the option to drop a job and find a better work environment. I have some other views on this, but that would be OT for this thread. > Either way, best if you keep your private conversations out of the office. Definitely agree on that.
- eru 6y ago
  > You're still missing the crux of the matter. You can't disapprove of something you don't know about. Well, it sounds like the regulation you might want is something that oDot could also live with: a requirement for full disclosure and clear labeling, but not a ban on anything.
  - Shared404 6y ago
    I would be quite fine with that. Maybe something akin to the labels required on cigarettes (in the US at least).
eaandkw 6y ago
Affordable Care Act
willis936 6y ago
Like poisoned water? Consumer protection exist for a good reason.

You are not obligated to buy anything you disapprove of

by oDot 6y ago

You are not obligated to buy anything you disapprove of

> We protect those who aren’t well versed in a topic through regulation for this reason. You're still missing the crux of the matter. You can't disapprove of something you don't know about. In addition (Slightly OT, but related), there are many people who do disapprove, but have to have access to a product/service in order to do their job. The only way to protect them is regulation.

oDot 6y ago
I get it -- beyond a certain point this sort of thing becomes fraud, which is already illegal. Regarding the job example -- the employer is also a human being, and if they want to get that TV they may. If you disapprove of that, you don't have to work there. Either way, best if you keep your private conversations out of the office.
- Shared404 6y ago
  > I get it -- beyond a certain point this sort of thing becomes fraud, which is already illegal. True. I suppose that the people asking for more regulation (myself included in this instance) would mostly just like for those laws to actually have teeth in this sort of situation. Unfortunately, lawmakers/enforcers mostly fall in the "not knowing" category. Also, my apologies if I came across as overly combative, that was not my intention. > If you disapprove of that, you don't have to work there. Unfortunately, many people do not have the option to drop a job and find a better work environment. I have some other views on this, but that would be OT for this thread. > Either way, best if you keep your private conversations out of the office. Definitely agree on that.
eru 6y ago
> You're still missing the crux of the matter. You can't disapprove of something you don't know about. Well, it sounds like the regulation you might want is something that oDot could also live with: a requirement for full disclosure and clear labeling, but not a ban on anything.
- Shared404 6y ago
  I would be quite fine with that. Maybe something akin to the labels required on cigarettes (in the US at least).

eaandkw 6y ago

Affordable Care Act

willis936 6y ago

Like poisoned water? Consumer protection exist for a good reason.