You’re making the assumption that all of the regulations are just, required and proportional.
If 1 additional person falls overboard every million man hours worked but everyone gets cheaper shipping, do I care? No, not really.
If your answer is yes, then do you care about the safety conditions of the factories of the goods being transported? How far are you willing to take this?
> You’re making the assumption that all of the regulations are just, requires and proportional.
> If 1 additional person falls overboard every million man hours worked but everyone gets cheaper shipping, do I care? No, not really.
If that's your problem, write your congressmen asking for the repeal of safety regulations because you want cheaper prices. However, that's totally orthogonal to the problem I was addressing with my proposal.
> If your answer is yes, then do you care about the safety conditions of the factories of the goods being transported? How far are you willing to take this?
Yes. Let's go for it and ban imports from those factories with shitty safety conditions, too.
Sure, those specific numbers suck - point well made.
Is one death per 10,000 careers too many? One in a million? No regulatory scheme short of "no goods may be transported anywhere" is going to create the latter outcome, so you can either accept that a line must be drawn or accept that anyone who doesn't live on a farm must starve.
You don't provide a path forward, and only make fun of something that is true, inflation and the money printer are running rampant. As for taxing, wealth redistribution is a way forward.
Next time please think about what you write, your useless comments don't advance conversation.
> You don't provide a path forward, and only make fun of something that is true, inflation and the money printer are running rampant. As for taxing, wealth redistribution is a way forward.
No one's talking about printing money except you. Meme comments and other regurgitations will get the responses they deserve.
> Next time please think about what you write, your useless comments don't advance conversation.
LOL. If you were serious you'd have replied to the GGP.
> If people aren't able to get out of poverty because the job never existed in the first place, are they really better off?
i think this is a false dichotomy: there is no universal law that says people in poverty must put up with abuse, slave wages and unsafe work environments in order to dig themselves out
> If 1 additional person falls overboard every million man hours worked but everyone gets cheaper shipping, do I care? No, not really.
This is one of the most selfish comments I have read in a while. You don't even care. If your only goal is to be able to buy more stuff without any ethical consideration you are a danger for everybody else in other countries, in other states, or anybody that is not you.
Looking into three economic side, worse work conditions attract less people and jobs to vacant. Your conclusion very is simplistic.
It's easy to see why that looks "selfish," but it's less easy to see the distributed effects of higher prices, fewer jobs, and less efficient markets so that you can sit remote from all of it and declare yourself to be more ethical than your neighbor.
Yeah I would and do avoid that. And no, I’m not doing research to make maximally ethical decisions. I would greatly prefer if it were either outlawed or at least clearly labeled
Thank you for invalidating any point you tried to make.
My point, why worry about shipping when everything it’s transporting follows the same lax safety laws. First world society is largely supported on the backs of third world countries full of people working their arses off for little pay and no opportunity for betterment.
Slave children can mine the minerals in the electronics, slave labor can assemble them but by god, if a boat docks port with any crew that are unfairly treated!
Your whole comment is an example of letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, which is surprising because the GP literally brought that concept up.
If you have to solve all problems to solve any problems, you'll solve no problems.
"Regulations reducing MOB situations by one person per million man hours worked" are not the issue.
The issue is that cargo ships are lawless and working on one of these ships, you have zero legal rights.
Nothing prevents ship operators from engaging in stuff ranging from not providing adequate staff levels and PPE, to wage theft, to human rights abuses like retaining people's passports / denying them shore leave / consular access. Need medical care? Tough shit. Don't want to work 100 hours? Guess you're not getting lunch today.
Life for a lot of these guys is barely a step above indentured servitude. Nobody cares. The spice must flow.
If that is your take, then how about we repeal all the existing labor and safety records in the US, at least then we can get the economic benefit from having the jobs here.
If 1 additional person falls overboard every million man hours worked but everyone gets cheaper shipping, do I care? No, not really.
If your answer is yes, then do you care about the safety conditions of the factories of the goods being transported? How far are you willing to take this?