5 ms·
Because it's their prerogative to support an agenda, work to pass laws and enforce them, not to strong arm private companies into obedience with threats of ret
by nilespotter 3y ago
Because it's their prerogative to support an agenda, work to pass laws and enforce them, not to strong arm private companies into obedience with threats of retaliatory regulation.
- delta_p_delta_x 3y agoThese are essentially synonyms: > pass laws and enforce them > strong arm private companies into obedience with threats of retaliatory regulation Companies are also entities subject to laws, and enforcement of laws against companies absolutely involves strong-arming them.
- nilespotter 3y agoThey're similar, but the later skips over the former. That's the problem. Right to repair isn't passed yet, the fact that this was released from the White House signals extralegal shenanigans that both I and the parent commenter take a dim view of.
- ericmay 3y agoIf that signals “extralegal shenanigans” you can just make the same claim with anything… so it’s not a very valuable signal.
- voidwtf 3y ago> Companies are also entities subject to laws, and enforcement of laws against companies absolutely involves strong-arming them. I'm sorry, what? Citizens vote for politicians that support their view/positions, or what they think is best for the country. Companies are subject to these laws because it is, at some level, the will of the people. Companies are not strong-armed, they simply are not above the law or the will of the people. If we could get corporate money out of politics we'd probably see a lot of companies being held responsible for shitty decisions. If anything large companies strong-arm our government and political system in the USA and abroad. It takes an inordinate amount of vocal opposition and work from citizens to hold companies responsible for their behavior.