4 ms·
>They just don’t believe in a society that cares for the weak and needy. There is some truth to that, but I don't think that explains their position on PFAS be
by hollerith 1y ago
>They just don’t believe in a society that cares for the weak and needy.
There is some truth to that, but I don't think that explains their position on PFAS because too much PFAS will disable even a strong healthy person. In this particular, it's more that they think that the harm is being exaggerated and that the actual, non-exaggerated degree of harm does not justify putting restrictions on business and commerce.
- shigawire 1y ago>that they think that the harm is being exaggerated and that the actual, non-exaggerated degree of harm does not justify putting restrictions on business and commerce I struggle to find a topic where they don't think this. It seems the burden of "proof" is too high. They don't believe in risks to health, the environment, climate, or even functional democracy itself. They think all are fake and profit is more important.
- hollerith 1y agoWhat you say is true in general, but there are execeptions: for example, the Republicans judge the harm done by heroin, fentanyl, amphetamine and cocaine to be very high -- probably higher than the average estimate of the harm as judged by the Democrats. Ditto street crime.
- nielsbot 1y agoMy understanding (without data, sorry) is that the conservative position blames drug addiction on bad choices and evil, rather than circumstances. As well the focus is on authoritarian policing as opposed to “harm reduction”. These are generalities, sure
- SantalBlush 1y agoThey will think this right up until these things affect them or their community. Then it will be someone else's fault--someone outside of their tribe--that it happened.