3 ms·
You are arguing for a less effective state though. At some point you have to accept that if we follow the constitution to a T it will lead to measurably bad out
by HDThoreaun 2y ago
You are arguing for a less effective state though. At some point you have to accept that if we follow the constitution to a T it will lead to measurably bad outcomes that we ought to attempt to avoid. Constitutional amendments are impossible due to tribalism, passing laws is next to impossible because congress is broken. Our options are “corporations write all regulations” or “we stretch the constitution so that experts can write sensible rules”
- pdonis 2y ago> You are arguing for a less effective state though. Less effective at messing things up, yes. You left out an alternative: corporations don't get government favors so they actually have to satisfy customers to stay in business.
- HDThoreaun 2y agoWhen have consumers ever cared about the externalities of the products they consume? You think that if a company starts polluting a river somewhere that will make a material difference to their business if the government couldn’t step in to stop them? Honestly I’m pretty sure that’d be good for sales sinxe they can offer the product at a lower price since they don’t need to clean up after themselves. The government needs to be able to solve market failures in a timely manner.