Libertarians are lazy

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by bheld

You don't need information handed to you to look at a creek and see beer cans and tires sticking up out of it. The people that were involved in the environmentalist movement weren't the ones polluting, they were just fed up with it. Environmental regulation was the enforcer. You think people cared back then what the environmentalists thought? Look at how they're treated today; people throwing crap in waterways back then wouldn't have given two shits what they said. It took stiff penalties to get them to stop, not a disapproving look from some "hippie."

That's not entirely true. Environmentalism is kindof a special case for how it propagated, especially since Nixon was a regulation freak, but look at this case:

If it came out the Coke was a crazy polluter... like, everything, water, soil, air, the works... and that shit was all over the news, do you think that regulation would be needed to get them to stop? And I'm talking about TODAY. With the environmental consciousness of America, do you think that people would still buy their shit?

Personally, I don't And then if that wasn't bad enough, people in nearby areas where the pollution was happening would start filing class action lawsuits against them for reckless endangerment and shit. All that would happen WITHOUT a single EPA regulation.

Information + Consumers >>>> police style regulation

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

That's not entirely true. Environmentalism is kindof a special case for how it propagated, especially since Nixon was a regulation freak, but look at this case:

If it came out the Coke was a crazy polluter... like, everything, water, soil, air, the works... and that shit was all over the news, do you think that regulation would be needed to get them to stop? And I'm talking about TODAY. With the environmental consciousness of America, do you think that people would still buy their shit?

Personally, I don't And then if that wasn't bad enough, people in nearby areas where the pollution was happening would start filing class action lawsuits against them for reckless endangerment and shit. All that would happen WITHOUT a single EPA regulation.

Information + Consumers >>>> police style regulation

I think most would still buy coke. Most people only care about themselves and aren't informed enough to know what's good for them. They will even go so far as to not care even when they know the truth.

Hell, look at how few people vote.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

I think most would still buy coke. Most people only care about themselves and aren't informed enough to know what's good for them. They will even go so far as to not care even when they know the truth.

Hell, look at how few people vote.

You say that despite Nike and Rebok seeing sharp declines in profit after it came out they used slave labor overseas? All this is the same shit... slavery, racial equality, environmentalism... they're all social evolutions.

Shit, there'd be a whole new Erin Brockovich-type movie with my previous example. People would be boycotting that shit. It'd be nuts.

[bheld]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

That's not entirely true. Environmentalism is kindof a special case for how it propagated, especially since Nixon was a regulation freak, but look at this case:

If it came out the Coke was a crazy polluter... like, everything, water, soil, air, the works... and that shit was all over the news, do you think that regulation would be needed to get them to stop? And I'm talking about TODAY. With the environmental consciousness of America, do you think that people would still buy their shit?

Personally, I don't And then if that wasn't bad enough, people in nearby areas where the pollution was happening would start filing class action lawsuits against them for reckless endangerment and shit. All that would happen WITHOUT a single EPA regulation.

Information + Consumers >>>> police style regulation

If Coke dropped their prices to be a quarter cheaper than Pepsi it wouldn't matter at all.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

Personally, I don't And then if that wasn't bad enough, people in nearby areas where the pollution was happening would start filing class action lawsuits against them for reckless endangerment and shit. All that would happen WITHOUT a single EPA regulation.

I kind of cruised over this part.


Lawsuits are for going after the people who harmed you.
Regulation is to stop them from doing it in the first place.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

I kind of cruised over this part.


Lawsuits are for going after the people who harmed you.
Regulation is to stop them from doing it in the first place.

If the threat of litigation isn't good enough to prevent shit like this, then regulation isn't doing shit either.

[bheld]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

If the threat of litigation isn't good enough to prevent shit like this, then regulation isn't doing shit either.

Yeah, but you can't go to jail in a civil suit.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

If the threat of litigation isn't good enough to prevent shit like this, then regulation isn't doing shit either.

If the Risk/Reward ratio is high enough for them, litigation won't do much. Not only that but if they can afford to settle out of court and have a NDA put into it, it won't go public either.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by bheld

Yeah, but you can't go to jail in a civil suit.

I think giving a shit ton of money to some people is a lot worse than jailtime It's not like they go to pound-me-in-the-ass prison anyway.

[bheld]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

I think giving a shit ton of money to some people is a lot worse than jailtime It's not like they go to pound-me-in-the-ass prison anyway.

Lew said earlier in this thread that freedom is more important than money.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

If the Risk/Reward ratio is high enough for them, litigation won't do much. Not only that but if they can afford to settle out of court and have a NDA put into it, it won't go public either.

That'd be a good time for some legislation to prevent that type of thing

I'm really not completely against environmental regulation, I'm just tossing around some ideas. Really, if you knowingly pollute the environment like they used to, then you need to be kneecapped.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by bheld

Lew said earlier in this thread that freedom is more important than money.

Don't mix up the different meanings of the word "freedom"

[Thorgrim]

In your great theory of the public demanding good instead of the government, note several things:

In the past, when smoking was labeled "harmful" big companies can laugh it off, now instead they would have launched campaigns talking about lack of evidence and so forth...but we all know that smoking kills now

Same thing with air bags, seat belts, etc, companies always fought them to save profits, and people were either uninformed or told a different story

People in Ohio might remember the Cuyahoga River, which caught fire three times, again many of the companies responsible shifted blame to each other, and as such the public was confused what to do, but the government wasn't, it cut through everything and ordered a clean up, now the river is clean

Another fault lies with people, and the public: they are not perfect, often they stress their doctor for a pill for every problem and they are overprescribed, resulting in thousands of deaths every year, neither the market nor the public wants any restriction, they would rather medicate themselves to death.

The public is also not extremely intelligent, you try to campaign about how we should double-hull tankers, and they would have looked at you with a face of puzzlement, "liberal doomsayers" then the exxon-valdez comes along and everything changes, but again its AFTER THE FACT

Libertarians are putting us in a world where we have to wait for a huge disaster before anything is done

Let's not forget the free market is the one who fought ozone protection, which saved all life on this planet

[lew]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

Looking at forests are rivers is violating some regulation?

It sure is if you do it at the "wrong times." Many National areas have times they are open, and if you are caught in there when they are "closed", there are severe penalties.


For example, there is a secluded beach not too far from where I live in the panhandle of Florida - it is a state or national park. If you get caught anywhere near it after dark, you're charged with murder, because you could *possibly kill some sea turtles' eggs.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by lew

It sure is if you do it at the "wrong times." Many National areas have times they are open, and if you are caught in there when they are "closed", there are severe penalties.


For example, there is a secluded beach not too far from where I live in the panhandle of Florida - it is a state or national park. If you get caught anywhere near it after dark, you're charged with murder, because you could *possibly kill some sea turtles' eggs.

Strangely I looked up local laws in all the panhandle communities of Florida, and court records...I could not find one person charged with murder when the only thing that happened was one person went on a secluded beach

I guess I'll have to go back until I find it!

[lew]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Strangely I looked up local laws in all the panhandle communities of Florida, and court records...I could not find one person charged with murder when the only thing that happened was one person went on a secluded beach

I guess I'll have to go back until I find it!

I bet you did.


Besides, a vast majority of local communities here are not on the interent. So, you woun't be able to find it.

And everything I said was told to me and my dad by a Park Ranger anyway, so not 100% sure if it's true. I just know what he told us.

He told us that if we go out on the beach at night, and have any sort of artificial light, it confuses the sea turtles. Because of this, we would be charged with a felony, and in some cases could be charged with some sort of murder degree.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by lew

It sure is if you do it at the "wrong times." Many National areas have times they are open, and if you are caught in there when they are "closed", there are severe penalties.

Funny how I can't walk into a government building when it closed either.

[lew]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

Funny how I can't walk into a government building when it closed either.

A building is completely different from land.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by lew

A building is completely different from land.

It is? It's all property.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

It is? It's all property.

Government owned isn't the same as public property