3 ms·
Suppose there are two products on the market. One, a children’s toy that sells for $9.99. The other a very similar children’s toy that uses lead paint, instead
by ncallaway 5y ago
Suppose there are two products on the market.
One, a children’s toy that sells for $9.99. The other a very similar children’s toy that uses lead paint, instead of a safer paint, but is otherwise very similar. It is not clearly labeled as having lead paint. The lead paint toy sells for $4.99.
If people buy the cheaper toy, does that mean people are “choosing” lead paint over the more expensive toy? No! It means people are unaware of the lead paint, or are unaware of the dangers of lead to children.
- endisneigh 5y agoYou're comparing seeing ads with children consuming lead paint? Lead paint has very obvious, bodily harm to children. Do ads harm children? Perhaps, but even if they did, there's no cost to visit a free-site without ads, or pay for a site without ads.
- ncallaway 5y ago> You're comparing seeing ads with children consuming lead paint? No, I’m not. You can tell, because I never made a comparison between the two. What I did was make a hypothetical that was more extreme, with an analogy of the underlying reasoning, to make my objections to that reasoning more apparent. But, that’s absolutely not a comparison, so no.
- goodpoint 5y ago> You're comparing seeing ads with children consuming lead paint? No, nobody said it's the same thing. It is an example of misleading business practices.