5 ms·

This is such a spot on observation. But the incentives aren’t there for business competitors to self-regulate in an ethical manner. That’s why we as users (and

This is such a spot on observation. But the incentives aren’t there for business competitors to self-regulate in an ethical manner. That’s why we as users (and yes, we’re all users to various degrees) should push for more robust regulation. If, as you correctly note, most competitors are only going to operate in the legal-but-unethical space, change the law until the legal avenue and the ethical avenue are the same. The libertarians will come out of the woodwork to say more regulation is not the answer, but when it comes to alternatives, watch the real world examples of “unregulated ethical businesses” melt away into the realm of the theoretical.

hammock 4y ago
> watch the real world examples of “unregulated ethical businesses” melt away into the realm of the theoretical Try an example of a regulated ethical business. Exxon? Verizon? Amazon? Nestle? UnitedHealth Group? Pfizer? General Motors? DuPont? Regulation is just as much a pipe dream as libertarianism
- alexhsamuel 4y ago
  Now try imagining those businesses in a world without regulation. No one has suggested that regulation will produce ethical business. The proposal is to impose regulation to limit the unethical behavior of business, which is something quite different.
  - hammock 4y ago
    > Now try imagining those businesses in a world without regulation. You’ve brought us back to the theoretical world we were trying to avoid…
- fragmede 4y ago
  Unless you're allergic to the entire concept of modern banking, I think most credit unions would apply. Local restaurants run by good people also would also seem to count.
- rqtwteye 4y ago
  Regulation reduces unethical behavior in the same way that laws reduce things like people killing each other. They don't eliminate bad behavior 100% but they reduce it by a lot. I grew up in the 70s and I can tell you what positive impact environmental regulation had on the world. It's not perfect but without these rules nothing would have happened. Big business fight every little step tooth and nail.
  - hammock 4y ago
    > I grew up in the 70s and I can tell you what positive impact environmental regulation had on the world. It's not perfect but without these rules nothing would have happened. I grew up in East Germany and I can tell you what positive impact free markets had on my country. It's not perfect but without these freedoms nothing would have happened
    - mrighele 4y ago
      Free market doesn't mean unregulated market
      - IG_Semmelweiss 4y ago
        Unregulated market doesn't mean a market with no referees or judges to settle disputes.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        rqtwteye 4y ago
        When you have judges and referees you need rules. How else would they make decisions?
      - godelski 4y ago
        Funny thing is Adam Smith talks about this extensively despite being the poster child for an unregulated "free" market.
- godelski 4y ago
  Regulation of these specific companies has saved many lives. We've reduced lead in gasoline which has increased IQ, decreased violence, and improved average well-being. We can find similar effects in each of these markets. While I agree that none of these markets act in a purely ethical manner it is hard to argue that regulation didn't reduce harm that these companies were causing prior to the regulation. If we perform purity tests we just give advantages to those doing the most harm as we squabble about the impossibility of doing no harm in a vastly complex and interconnected world. Instead, focus on harm reduction, which we can continually perform and converge towards a more perfect solution rather than requiring that we go all in or not at all.
  - hammock 4y ago
    Deregulation has saved lives just as regulation has. How many millions have been brought out of poverty and saved from starvation during the globalist revolution? My point is that regulation is not a panacea and sounds great in theory, just like free markets sound great in theory to others. An open mind and a flexible approach are warranted
    - rqtwteye 4y ago
      "An open mind and a flexible approach are warranted" Of course. You can't just blindly follow an ideology but you have to constantly think about the proper balance of all factors. Overregulation is not good and neither is underregulation.
    - godelski 4y ago
      > Deregulation has saved lives just as regulation has. I don't disagree. I'm more an Adam Smith guy. Low regulation is good, but that doesn't mean zero. Zero regulation is just as terrible as the government picking winners and losers. These discussions require a lot of nuance. I, and I'm assuming many others, read your comment as a very typical libertarian "free market" (but like communism, has "never really existed"), as your comment doesn't even hint at a nuance. I tried to allude to this in mine with my comment about the incredible complexity of our modern world, but I guess this too was missed. So I hope that is abundantly explicit now.
trinsic2 4y ago
I don't follow any particular political mindset. I watch patterns, and patterns in government regulation have shown me that there is just as much corruption in regulation as there is in businesses that are unethical. So I have doubts that regulation is the answer. I would be more comfortable with putting my support behind people or small organizations that actually care about the specifics of this, then with 90% of politicians that mostly want to stay in power, and benefit off of their political position.

hammock 4y ago

> watch the real world examples of “unregulated ethical businesses” melt away into the realm of the theoretical Try an example of a regulated ethical business. Exxon? Verizon? Amazon? Nestle? UnitedHealth Group? Pfizer? General Motors? DuPont? Regulation is just as much a pipe dream as libertarianism

alexhsamuel 4y ago
Now try imagining those businesses in a world without regulation. No one has suggested that regulation will produce ethical business. The proposal is to impose regulation to limit the unethical behavior of business, which is something quite different.
- hammock 4y ago
  > Now try imagining those businesses in a world without regulation. You’ve brought us back to the theoretical world we were trying to avoid…
fragmede 4y ago
Unless you're allergic to the entire concept of modern banking, I think most credit unions would apply. Local restaurants run by good people also would also seem to count.
rqtwteye 4y ago
Regulation reduces unethical behavior in the same way that laws reduce things like people killing each other. They don't eliminate bad behavior 100% but they reduce it by a lot. I grew up in the 70s and I can tell you what positive impact environmental regulation had on the world. It's not perfect but without these rules nothing would have happened. Big business fight every little step tooth and nail.
- hammock 4y ago
  > I grew up in the 70s and I can tell you what positive impact environmental regulation had on the world. It's not perfect but without these rules nothing would have happened. I grew up in East Germany and I can tell you what positive impact free markets had on my country. It's not perfect but without these freedoms nothing would have happened
  - mrighele 4y ago
    Free market doesn't mean unregulated market
    - IG_Semmelweiss 4y ago
      Unregulated market doesn't mean a market with no referees or judges to settle disputes.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - rqtwteye 4y ago
        When you have judges and referees you need rules. How else would they make decisions?
    - godelski 4y ago
      Funny thing is Adam Smith talks about this extensively despite being the poster child for an unregulated "free" market.
godelski 4y ago
Regulation of these specific companies has saved many lives. We've reduced lead in gasoline which has increased IQ, decreased violence, and improved average well-being. We can find similar effects in each of these markets. While I agree that none of these markets act in a purely ethical manner it is hard to argue that regulation didn't reduce harm that these companies were causing prior to the regulation. If we perform purity tests we just give advantages to those doing the most harm as we squabble about the impossibility of doing no harm in a vastly complex and interconnected world. Instead, focus on harm reduction, which we can continually perform and converge towards a more perfect solution rather than requiring that we go all in or not at all.
- hammock 4y ago
  Deregulation has saved lives just as regulation has. How many millions have been brought out of poverty and saved from starvation during the globalist revolution? My point is that regulation is not a panacea and sounds great in theory, just like free markets sound great in theory to others. An open mind and a flexible approach are warranted
  - rqtwteye 4y ago
    "An open mind and a flexible approach are warranted" Of course. You can't just blindly follow an ideology but you have to constantly think about the proper balance of all factors. Overregulation is not good and neither is underregulation.
  - godelski 4y ago
    > Deregulation has saved lives just as regulation has. I don't disagree. I'm more an Adam Smith guy. Low regulation is good, but that doesn't mean zero. Zero regulation is just as terrible as the government picking winners and losers. These discussions require a lot of nuance. I, and I'm assuming many others, read your comment as a very typical libertarian "free market" (but like communism, has "never really existed"), as your comment doesn't even hint at a nuance. I tried to allude to this in mine with my comment about the incredible complexity of our modern world, but I guess this too was missed. So I hope that is abundantly explicit now.

trinsic2 4y ago

I don't follow any particular political mindset. I watch patterns, and patterns in government regulation have shown me that there is just as much corruption in regulation as there is in businesses that are unethical. So I have doubts that regulation is the answer. I would be more comfortable with putting my support behind people or small organizations that actually care about the specifics of this, then with 90% of politicians that mostly want to stay in power, and benefit off of their political position.