4 ms·
They do, and they often do collect accurate data. Philip Morris, for example, knew about the danger of smoking for decades, and Exxon knew all about the greenho
by throwaway_7274 3mo ago
They do, and they often do collect accurate data. Philip Morris, for example, knew about the danger of smoking for decades, and Exxon knew all about the greenhouse effect. They didn’t publish that data, of course, and publicly argued to the contrary.
- groundzeros2015 3mo agoAnd governments don’t face bad incentives that would cause them to hide information?
- munk-a 3mo agoLet's have the government collect the data and private companies can engage in that as well if they wish - both parties can call the other out if there's a discrepancy. IMO the government's incentives are generally better aligned with truth telling but there are reasons[1] that independent studies may still catch the government out. 1. Famously, up here in Canada, Stephen Harper suppressed accurate dissemination of climate data during his administration that was only really discovered through independent analysis.
- groundzeros2015 3mo agoI would characterize it as the things the government would lie about are different than the things a company would lie about.
- throwaway_7274 3mo agoThey do. Often for different kinds of things. It’s not “government good, private bad” or the other way around. Both are facile views.
- groundzeros2015 3mo agoAgreed. Different organizations with different incentives. Neither of them have the privileged or an unbiased view.