4 ms·

What is government for, if not for solving the issues of the populace it is governing?

by mycocola 4y ago

phpisthebest 4y ago
[flagged]
- Symbiote 4y ago
  I am generally pleased with the EU's approach to defending me against pollution and traffic accidents.
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    That however was not my opening inquiry which was "is there any area of life at all in the EU that should be free from government interference?"
    - CodexArcana 4y ago
      That's not what you said. You said "why does the EU believe that every part of life needs government regulation." And it's because, as Milton Friedman once said, "a corporation's responsibility is to make as much money for the stockholders as possible." Without a counter balance you wouldn't have seat belts, crumple zones, fuel efficiency standards, the list goes on and on. Safety is not the responsibility of the corporation. Their only priority is profit.
      - phpisthebest 4y ago
        >>as Milton Friedman once said, "a corporation's responsibility is to make as much money for the stockholders as possible." That is an over simplification of his Position, and often misused as you have here, just like people that misuse Poppers paradox of tolerance to justify censorship of people they dislike, you misuse Friedman to criticize a economic system you dislike >>Safety is not the responsibility of the corporation. Yes and no. They still face liability if not protected by the government. Which often time government regulation come with liability shields protecting said corporations that is why large corporations like regulation; as it often prevents competition while at the same time protecting them from liability Further they face competition based on safety, automotive companies compete widely on the safety records of their vehicles with many marketing the features and safety testing results that exceed government requirements, this means there is a MARKET driver to increase safety and it is not just government regulations that drive safety. Infact some automakers are at odds over the government because technology in the area of safety (lighting is the big one) is changing faster than regulations can keep up and many manufacturers would like to make changes to their cars that would make them safer but are prohibited because of regulations.
- devnullbrain 4y ago
  Legislation like this would 'protect persons' as making the wise decision not to buy a car with the offending UI won't stop you from being t-boned by someone who did. Consumers need protection from people who make selfish decisions.

What is government for, if not for solving the issues of the populace it is governing?

phpisthebest 4y ago

[flagged]

Symbiote 4y ago
I am generally pleased with the EU's approach to defending me against pollution and traffic accidents.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  That however was not my opening inquiry which was "is there any area of life at all in the EU that should be free from government interference?"
  - CodexArcana 4y ago
    That's not what you said. You said "why does the EU believe that every part of life needs government regulation." And it's because, as Milton Friedman once said, "a corporation's responsibility is to make as much money for the stockholders as possible." Without a counter balance you wouldn't have seat belts, crumple zones, fuel efficiency standards, the list goes on and on. Safety is not the responsibility of the corporation. Their only priority is profit.
    - phpisthebest 4y ago
      >>as Milton Friedman once said, "a corporation's responsibility is to make as much money for the stockholders as possible." That is an over simplification of his Position, and often misused as you have here, just like people that misuse Poppers paradox of tolerance to justify censorship of people they dislike, you misuse Friedman to criticize a economic system you dislike >>Safety is not the responsibility of the corporation. Yes and no. They still face liability if not protected by the government. Which often time government regulation come with liability shields protecting said corporations that is why large corporations like regulation; as it often prevents competition while at the same time protecting them from liability Further they face competition based on safety, automotive companies compete widely on the safety records of their vehicles with many marketing the features and safety testing results that exceed government requirements, this means there is a MARKET driver to increase safety and it is not just government regulations that drive safety. Infact some automakers are at odds over the government because technology in the area of safety (lighting is the big one) is changing faster than regulations can keep up and many manufacturers would like to make changes to their cars that would make them safer but are prohibited because of regulations.
devnullbrain 4y ago
Legislation like this would 'protect persons' as making the wise decision not to buy a car with the offending UI won't stop you from being t-boned by someone who did. Consumers need protection from people who make selfish decisions.