2 ms·
The implication here is that this doesn't have a convincing case behind it? Then when would you act? There are already plenty of monopolies and "lobbies" in Ame
by Chris2048 5y ago
The implication here is that this doesn't have a convincing case behind it?
Then when would you act? There are already plenty of monopolies and "lobbies" in America on the basis of the same efficiency (not acting until it's a "problem") - maybe proactive caution around big business should be the norm given all the historical abuses, from beef to chemicals to medicine to tobacco?
- ImPostingOnHN 5y ago> The implication here is that this doesn't have a convincing case behind it? The explication, I guess, yeah. I was and am explicitly saying that, yes. > Then when would you act? When the prediction that this may become a issue becomes more convincing, somewhere between where it's at now, and climate change, which already has a convincing case that it WILL become a issue (nay, IS one!) > maybe proactive caution around big business should be the norm given all the historical abuses Agreed, proactive caution towards things for which there is a convincing case that it is or may become an issue