3 ms·

This would be a nice rebuttal save for the fact that universally, they are operating under the same incentives where arbitration is cheaper than courts. You're

This would be a nice rebuttal save for the fact that universally, they are operating under the same incentives where arbitration is cheaper than courts. You're making an argument that the number of companies somehow implies a diversity of behavior. Sorry, I wish it were true, but it isn't backed by fact, logic, economics 101, or even reality.

SideQuark 4y ago
> This would be a nice rebuttal save for the fact that universally, they are operating under the same incentives where arbitration is cheaper than courts. Except I replied to a comment about companies being merged, and every subsequent comment in this thread was about diversity of companies. If you want to derail that, and ignore that the evidence I presented is a factual rebuttal of that topic, then yes, I did not rebut the argument you're having in your head outside this thread. Next, even your derailed claim about "fact, logic, economics... " argument is not solid, since millions of companies do not use mandatory arbitration. Maybe they didn't get your memo about how it's so clear that mandatory arbitration is the only solution seen in practice. Care to provide the percentage of companies not using it? So - once again, black-and-white one-size-fits-all beliefs are demonstrably not backed bt "fact, logic, economics 101, or even reality." Try looking for nuance and you'll learn a more accurate world view.