Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rukkyg
A libertarian would say that a corporation would spend extra money if it was eocnomically beneficial. That is, that people would hear about the horrible pollution or the person falling off the smoke stack, and then would boycott the corporation's products until they did something about it.
|
Yes, that would be their position. The problem is that it is totally idealistic and unpractical. How many fucking boycotts are going on as we speak? They may work on large corporations that have constant advertising and are totally consumer-driven products.
Say there is a sand and gravel opertation down the street. Instead of watering down the rocks before they are processed, they do nothing. As a result the dust in the immediate area is increased. People have health problems and it's a nucianse. It doesn't effect that many people so those outside of the area don't give a fuck. Nobody outside that area is going to join a boycott. Nobody will hear bad publicity.
People in the area could take them to court but there are no laws saying the company has to do anything about it. It becomes a battle of the lawyers. If you think we have problems with frivolous lawsuits, wait till we "let the market decide" As it is right now, the agency that has jurisdiction can shut them down immediately for doing this.