> They wouldn't say do this or you'll go to jail. They would say do this or we won't give you a giant tax cut. "Won't give you a tax cut" translates to "pay us

> They wouldn't say do this or you'll go to jail. They would say do this or we won't give you a giant tax cut. "Won't give you a tax cut" translates to "pay us a percentage of your earnings, otherwise we will throw you in jail." So, I'd like to disagree here and say my original assertion was accurate. > Negative externalities should be regulated to some degree. Otherwise we could have a tragedy of the commons situation. I am not convinced this applies here. Solar panels over the parking lot sounds like a solution to an invented problem. Parking lots are not harming the environment. If Samsung is paying for the land, they should be able to do whatever they like on that land as long as it doesn't harm someone else. This sounds like the typical anti-car communist mindset that I've seen many times over here on hn, which I find highly weird. Cars are probably the best innovation humanity has done in the entire history of the species, and I guess people are triggered by that fact?