Killing your own grandparents to own the libs

[kpete]

[treestar]

1. Communicable diseases

is one thing where even the looniest libertarians should realize their self-interest.

[louis-t]

2. They don't! I was talking to a Libertarian 'free market' guy once.

He hated regulations. I said "so it's ok if someone makes a product that kills 3,000 people?" The words weren't out of my mouth and he yelled "then no one will buy the product anymore! See? Free market." I said "How very Republican of you to be willing to sacrifice 3,000 of your fellow citizens for your stupid ideology."

[Caliman73]

3. Plus, his answer is bullshit.

If there is no strong government regulation and this company is rich enough to suppress the information about the deaths, people will not know about them, or because of advertisement and general apathy in our population, no one will care and continue to buy the product. There has not been, to my knowledge, a company that was shut down solely because people collectively learned about a bad product and stopped buying their products.

Their whole silly ideology is built on Rational decision making which exists in theory, but because of advertising, does not exist in the real world. They are usually naive and/or without an ethical or moral compass.

[Mosby]

4. +1 the invisible hand made up theory.

[Caliman73]

5. The invisible hand

Is built on the aggregate of all of those "Rational Decisions" and enlightened self interest. It is a fairy tale ideology. They assume that they have all of the information about the product they are buying and all of the possible outcomes of their decisions to buy or not to buy.

[treestar]

8. I debated one about restaurants

saying you'd have no regulation, so you'd need to inspect the kitchen for yourself if you were to eat in a restaurant. He'd go by reputation. So if it was a brand new business? And things can go wrong even where there is a good reputation.

It's in their self-interest to keep the place clean, so customers don't get sick. But usually the interest in keeping costs down leads to some wililngness to take some risks.

[ck4829]

6. That would be totally adorable if it didn't have damaging, even dangerous, consequences

[ck4829]

7. Wow. Purdue Pharma on line one.

[treestar]

9. And then you can only sue after the deaths

Yeah no one will buy it anymore, but the people are already dead. And the company could be broke and not able to pay the settlements.

Plus the Pinto case, where they deliberately saved on costs knowing it would cost lives but figuring it would cost less to pay the damages!