1, 2, Bernie's coming for you...

[Ptolemy]

Yes! More like this! 

I take it you don't know either?

[chuckjames]

No one here is arguing for Soviet like communism, but keep arguing against that straw man.

Venezuela and Argentina are not "Soviet like communism" either. They both put their economies in the shitter. I'm not using strawman.

I think most of South American/ African economies are screwed no matter the system or government,  because there is no basic rule of law in those parts of the world. Corruption is king. If you look at what the western countries that have modern economies all have in common it's a resemblance of rule of law as its backbone. 

[sys]

i can't take this anymore.  rein /= reign.  goddamn.

[star seed 7]

i can't take this anymore.  rein /= reign.  goddamn.

 

[CNS]

It's crazy that ppl actually think the market would self reg things that would cost them money.   

[Ptolemy]

So we just let the market decide? Who cares if I pollute the river, that's the people problem down stream. I made my money already.

If a company depends on the river to conduct its business, there is a market incentive to not destroy it.

[star seed 7]

So we just let the market decide? Who cares if I pollute the river, that's the people problem down stream. I made my money already.

If a company depends on the river to conduct its business, there is a market incentive to not destroy it.

more more more 

[chuckjames]

So we just let the market decide? Who cares if I pollute the river, that's the people problem down stream. I made my money already.

If a company depends on the river to conduct its business, there is a market incentive to not destroy it.

And if it doesn't depend on the river to conduct business?

[chuckjames]

It's crazy that ppl actually think the market would self reg things that would cost them money.

The invisible hand and such.

[CNS]

What if they only need running water, not potable water?  eff the others down stream, right?  What if it costs them less to truck in potable water than it does to ship out hazardous waste responsibly? Dump it in the river because it makes fiscal sense.

[Ptolemy]

It's crazy that ppl actually think the market would self reg things that would cost them money.

It's even crazier that people think without govt regulation McDonald's would serve food that would poison and kill their clientele.

[Ptolemy]

And if it doesn't depend on the river to conduct business?

You brought the river into the discussion, not me.

[star seed 7]

It's crazy that ppl actually think the market would self reg things that would cost them money.

It's even crazier that people think without govt regulation McDonald's would serve food that would poison and kill their clientele.

 

[CNS]

No one is saying that, dumbass

[chuckjames]

And if it doesn't depend on the river to conduct business?

You brought the river into the discussion, not me.

Ok, there are plenty examples of a company poisoning a river that it the company doesn't depend on for business what's your free market solution to that?

[star seed 7]

innovation, duh

 

[chuckjames]

No one is saying that, dumbass

'Lemy is the king of strawman arguments. I'm beginning to learn this.

[Tobias]

'lemy is the king of the pit, period

[Ptolemy]

What if they only need running water, not potable water?  eff the others down stream, right?  What if it costs them less to truck in potable water than it does to ship out hazardous waste responsibly? Dump it in the river because it makes fiscal sense.

Well, in this river-dependent society you created, if the corporation only needs running water to do it's business, the people need to eat and living and working close to the river makes it likely that they will fish for food. Thus there is incentive to not dump hazardous waste into the river, and it has nothing to do with government.

[star seed 7]

'lemy is the king of the pit, period

renocat sure better start bringing his a game

[star seed 7]

What if they only need running water, not potable water?  eff the others down stream, right?  What if it costs them less to truck in potable water than it does to ship out hazardous waste responsibly? Dump it in the river because it makes fiscal sense.

Well, in this river-dependent society you created, if the corporation only needs running water to do it's business, the people need to eat and living and working close to the river makes it likely that they will fish for food. Thus there is incentive to not dump hazardous waste into the river, and it has nothing to do with government.

HALL

[Ptolemy]

Ok, there are plenty examples of a company poisoning a river that it the company doesn't depend on for business what's your free market solution to that?

OK, let's go there. First define poisoning? You're defending a federal government that declares what you exhale and plants consume as a pollutant. So what company is poisoning a river and what's the poison?

[chuckjames]

What if they only need running water, not potable water?  eff the others down stream, right?  What if it costs them less to truck in potable water than it does to ship out hazardous waste responsibly? Dump it in the river because it makes fiscal sense.

Well, in this river-dependent society you created, if the corporation only needs running water to do it's business, the people need to eat and living and working close to the river makes it likely that they will fish for food. Thus there is incentive to not dump hazardous waste into the river, and it has nothing to do with government.

And yet companies before all those needles regulations dumped hazardous waste into the rivers, even if was supposedly in the benefit not to.

[Ptolemy]

And yet companies before all those needles regulations dumped hazardous waste into the rivers, even if was supposedly in the benefit not to.

The two companies need to coexist. You don't need government to make them get along.

[chuckjames]

Ok, there are plenty examples of a company poisoning a river that it the company doesn't depend on for business what's your free market solution to that?

OK, let's go there. First define poisoning? You're defending a federal government that declares what you exhale and plants consume as a pollutant. So what company is poisoning a river and what's the poison?

I mean technically Carbon Dioxide kills you, so I would consider that a pollutant too. But even if I gave you carbon dioxide, there are plenty on man made chemicals that have been dumped into rivers that are poisonous.

http://m.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/athome/teflon-and-perfluorooctanoic-acid--pfoa

This c-8 stuff was dumped by Dow chemicals into a river in West Virginia. I would consider that poison.