4 ms·
Are you proposing that governments should be unable to revoke permits? Because that's really the only way to prevent permits being revoked after a company has s
by ARandumGuy 5y ago
Are you proposing that governments should be unable to revoke permits? Because that's really the only way to prevent permits being revoked after a company has spent billions of dollars.
I think the more pragmatic answer to these companies is "don't invest billions of dollars in controversial projects that can be undone if your permits are revoked"
- trixie_ 5y agoYou contradict yourself arguing that the government should be able to revoke any permit, and then saying, don't invest in projects with permits which can be revoked. Any project can be 'controversial' depending on who is in power. The real pragmatic answer is that the government should be liable for investments lost by revoking a permit.
- kelnos 5y agoThis project has been controversial since inception, though, and that did not change when Trump and the GOP came into power in 2016, despite what seems to be a sham approval rammed through by that administration. The controversy and lawsuits did not magically disappear.
- fallingknife 5y agoGovernments should only be allowed to revoke permits in narrowly defined circumstances laid out in the permit at the time it is granted. Governments should have as much (I would say even more) of an obligation to keep their word as any other party doing business in the economy.