This is reminiscent of you're guilty of monopoly if we think your prices are too high. You're guilty of predatory pricing if we think your prices are too low. And you're guilty of collusion if we think your prices are competitive.
Cultural marxists believe that justice is to be used as merely a tool to shape society, deconstructing that which they believe should not be. They are basic programmed this way. No truth, No meaning. No certainty.
Justice as a tool for what they think ought to be! Reminds me of the Is/Ought dichotomy. Rand solved it, but the SJWs can't relate what Ought to be with what Is.
It is unfortunate that many of the things we should trust these days are merely being used as tools to enslave us. In a meanless world: News is not news. Justice is not justice. Education is not education. Science is not science. Men and women are not different. A is not A
Very Orwellian Maybe even more Orwellian than Orwell imagined.
Yes, even Hayek wrote extensively about this in his Mirage of Social Justice and complained about the misuse of language and misunderstanding of terms. It seems the progressive education system has created a bunch of fools, intentionally.
Great point, there's nothing here, but our intentions are honorable, we're only trying to protect the shareholders we're trying to screw. The message is, only invest in green companies.
Ugh. I tried to cover this neutrally on the site I write for. The trolls came out for a feast on social media. Apparently, Exxon has upset people for a long time. Heh. This lawsuit should be fought with a simple, "We did calculate the cost of government regulation on our long-term business projections - we found it to be zero. When the science wins - either by disproving man's impact on the climate or engineering solutions to every problem presented - we will happily be making just as much damn money as before." If there's a source of energy that will make money in ways that everyone is happy with, why wouldn't a multi-billion dollar energy company have a huge role to play?
Hello Jane - very interesting comment, what is the site you write for? And I like the recommendation, fight the lawsuit with a simple statement, let reality be the judge and jury, poetic justice. And reason will deal with the result. Your last question, as you probably know, is anathema to the social justice crowd. No one should make money, particularly a multi-billion dollar energy company. To the irrational, making money is no different than fraud.
Hello! Oh, yes, indeed. I regularly read long Reddit/Twitter conversations involving some blend of collectivists railing against the historical "misdeeds" of capitalism. I should really use a separate account for it since the algorithms now think I want to see more of that sort of thing on my feed. The site is Teslarati.
The site you write for is Teslarati? I can only imagine how that was derived, and if I'm right, its fabulous. I also write, the blog is centerforindividualism.org, and I'm beginning a new series and plan on featuring Tesla. I'll look it up!
Yes, that's the site! The Tesla crowd is an interesting blend - plenty of big-gov "green" types, but plenty of capitalists, too. I came to it via the SpaceX content, originally, but if there's anything you're wondering about Tesla, those guys have covered it. They're nuts! In a good way, of course. :)
I had already bookmarked your site to start reading through this week. Looks like some great stuff!
Nice, thanks, I looked for an article of yours, no such luck yet. And I was wrong, my first impression was Nikola Tesla, that's who I will write about. Of course he is the namesake. So being a Tesla motor car advocate, and a Rand advocate, the natural question is how do you compare Tesla with the 20th Century Motor Car Company? Or is there a comparison? This is very interesting.
The article on the underwater bot is mine - if you click there and then on my author name, it gives everything I've written.
Ha! No comparison between the two, although there is a back and forth about the workers wanting to unionize. Musk is a bit like Reardon in work ethic, but cares way too much about others' opinions.
I just heard about it here, but I think the gov't should err on the side of not suing, in the case of Exxon or hedgies. In the case of Exxon, I'd have to know if managers suppressed information until they could sell their own shares. In the case of the hedge funds, their taking speculative positions provides liquidity. Unsophisticated investors have contempt for shorts, but it's not justified. Shorts eventually have to close their positions. It provides liquidity, decreases spreads.
If me dino ran Exxon, I'd shrug by removing all my business from New York State. Meanwhile I'd very publicly advise all my competitors to do the same lest New York State screw them over too. Hoo boy! I can just hear the screams and yells of all those NYC taxi companies going super ballistic.
Why? Aren't the cab drivers there horrendously mistreated too, being forced to buy a $60,000 "medalion" in order to operate? Maybe they should shrug too, along with Exxon?
The Martin Act should be repealed - giving such power to the state is crazy.
They are basic programmed this way. No truth, No meaning. No certainty.
In a meanless world: News is not news. Justice is not justice. Education is not education. Science is not science. Men and women are not different. A is not A
Very Orwellian
Maybe even more Orwellian than Orwell imagined.
I had already bookmarked your site to start reading through this week. Looks like some great stuff!
Ha! No comparison between the two, although there is a back and forth about the workers wanting to unionize. Musk is a bit like Reardon in work ethic, but cares way too much about others' opinions.
Meanwhile I'd very publicly advise all my competitors to do the same lest New York State screw them over too.
Hoo boy! I can just hear the screams and yells of all those NYC taxi companies going super ballistic.