3 ms·
>> Is your argument really that because things were really bad in 1905 we shouldn't complain... No that is not my argument really.
by rufus_foreman 2y ago
>> Is your argument really that because things were really bad in 1905 we shouldn't complain...
No that is not my argument really.
- kubb 2y agoYou're not really making an argument.
- rufus_foreman 2y agoOK. If I'm not making an argument then we both agree that my argument is not that because things were really bad in 1905 we shouldn't complain that after many decades of progress. Thanks for agreeing with me, kubb.
- kubb 2y agoNo objections from me, but also no need to thank me. I just stated the obvious.
- rufus_foreman 2y ago>> I just stated the obvious No, you did way worse that that.
- kubb 2y agoYou’re not saying anything substantial again, albeit in passively aggressive tone.
- dredmorbius 2y agoYou might care to specify what exactly your argument is then, as I'd formed a similar conclusion. The Jungle led to an era of reform over nearly a century in which laissez faire and caveat emptor were displaced, largely to positive results, by appropriate regulation. That regulatory turn had been opposed, increasingly dismantled since the Reagan administration, and in the past month and some has been outright dynamited. The consequences are beginning to show. If that is your argument, it would benefit by more precise communication.