Smug Prius owners

[Bayou Bum]

What free-market mechanism ties the suppliers of such products to the harm they cause?

1. lawsuits
2. people won't buy their products anymore.

What has the government done to stop China from making products with lead in them? Even though it is illegal, China manufacturers are still doing it. The only thing stopping them currently is the market.

[tchwojko]

1. lawsuits
2. people won't buy their products anymore.

What has the government done to stop China from making products with lead in them? Even though it is illegal, China manufacturers are still doing it. The only thing stopping them currently is the market.

But how will consumers know whom to sue, or whose product to avoid?
Who found the lead in China's products?

(Lawsuits are held in courts which are government entities. Are you considering that to be part of a free market solution?)

[Fechter1]

Even though it is illegal, China manufacturers are still doing it.

And people are still buying them... Free market working, right?

Actually, a lot of chinese manufacturers of children's fashion jewelry have moved away from lead, because of product regulations here in the US (bad, evil government, right?). However, they're now using Cadmium, which is even more harmful, and which is going to require additional regulation so stop this practice. Free market at work, no government intervention needed, right?

[jeff]

Lawsuits as a effective means of eliminating harmful products? Don't make me laugh. It can helpful, but lawsuits can be stalled for years in the court systems as plaintiffs delay (consider the legal battles over tobacco, or remediating GE's PCB pollution) or stall proceedings, or they can out-gun the opposition, or they can quietly buy out a few individual cases here and there while continuing business practices.

Let's consider:

- the entire tobacco industry
- Fen Phen (withdrawn based on FDA action)
- Thalidomide
- asbestos *cough* *cough*
- the Good Old Days of unsafe cars (Pinto, Corvair, the US manufacturers resistance to safety in general). Note that the US Govt forced Toyota into the recall - NOT lawsuits.
- lead paints (a good counter example because the harm is done to somebody other than the consumer)

Government intervention was the primary mechanism of reducing harm, not the free market. Off the top of my head before having coffee... which probably is bad for me too.... I'm not saying that lawsuits and the free market don't have any effect, but don't count on them for consumer protection.

[Inquartata]

Perhaps the problem is in the attitude that only instant results are acceptable; that because "it takes time" for lawsuits ( or market forces ) to work, they MUST be replaced by government intervention! I.Need.It. Right. Now!


"Impatience is the father of error."

[jeff]

Uh, sure. Because it's absolutely acceptable to have people die until the lawsuits (which can be lost) or free market get around to solving the problem some unknown years or decades in the future. Yes, anything else is a sign of childish impatience.

[migopod]

Uh, sure. Because it's absolutely acceptable to have people die until the lawsuits (which can be lost) or free market get around to solving the problem some unknown years or decades in the future. Yes, anything else is a sign of childish impatience.

Better yet, how about when companies that have dangerous products consider the impact of out of court settlements part of the cost of doing business if it costs them less than changing their product would?

[TBean]

While patience is a virtue that should be employed in many situations I am uncertain I wish to wait for market forces and lawsuits to police products, for example, that I ingest (food, medications, etc). I would rather have the attempt made to create the safety net for the consumer prior to release to the open public - even an imperfect system that will still have its misses is better than nothing.

[Hauptman]

Better yet, how about when companies that have dangerous products consider the impact of out of court settlements part of the cost of doing business if it costs them less than changing their product would?

Yeah, but that's what punitive damages are for, right?

Unless you're proposing that we set arbitrary limits on lawsuit payouts... oh wait... never mind... that's just the free-market at work, right?

[tchwojko]

Perhaps the problem is in the attitude that only instant results are acceptable; that because "it takes time" for lawsuits ( or market forces ) to work, they MUST be replaced by government intervention! I.Need.It. Right. Now!


"Impatience is the father of error."

Prevention is for wusses.

[erik_blank]

Prevention is for wusses.

Besides, bad things only happen to other people, and they always deserve the bad things that happen to them... Right? (didn't I read that some where?...)

[migopod]

Yeah, but that's what punitive damages are for, right?

Unless you're proposing that we set arbitrary limits on lawsuit payouts... oh wait... never mind... that's just the free-market at work, right?

Punitive damages only really happen if it's not settled out of court. Besides, won't tort reforms pretty much make frivolous things like product liability a happy memory? So then we're down to the only regulating factor being market pressure, and it's well established that consumers will always buy a more expensive product if it's known to be marginally safer.

[jeff]

...and it's well established that consumers will always buy a more expensive product if it's known to be marginally safer.

You betcha! And manufacturers are so fastidious about revealing dangers to the public caused by their products, in their desire to make sure consumers can make informed choices. Why, just imagine how terrible it would have been if, for example, car manufacturers hid crash information like withe Pinto, or tobacco manufacturers failed to disclose the cancer and emphysema caused by their products. It's a good thing the free market prevents those sorts of things from happening!

[fencerchica]

Perhaps the problem is in the attitude that only instant results are acceptable; that because "it takes time" for lawsuits ( or market forces ) to work, they MUST be replaced by government intervention! I.Need.It. Right. Now!


"Impatience is the father of error."

I nominate you to impart the above wisdom to those harmed by dangerous products, or their surviving relatives. I bet they'll take it very well.

[jeff]

Coming back to the "Dog Whistle racism" subthread here - for anyone who thinks that this is something that only happened during the Jim Crow days and nobody would ever think of doing any more, here's two modern instances:

- When Harold Ford. ran for Tennessee senate in 2006, the Republican National Committee paid for an ad showing a sexy blond mouthing "call me". Ford is black. His then girlfriend, now his wife, is blond.

- When John McCain ran for the Republican candidacy for President in 2000, he was hit by a smear campaign by his major primary opponent's organization that alleged that his adopted (and quite dark) Bengladeshi daughter was his illegitimate black daughter.

Naw, Republican operatives appealing to and exploiting racism? Couldn't happen in this century. Nope.

[jessicasimpson]

- When Harold Ford. ran for Tennessee senate in 2006, the Republican National Committee paid for an ad showing a sexy blond mouthing "call me". Ford is black. His then girlfriend, now his wife, is blond.

Also before this election, there were "public service" fliers found circulating in low income neighborhood saying the police would be at the polls checking for outstanding warrants and collecting back rent. There were worse things I saw when Jessie Helms was running against a black man in North Carolina.

[Bayou Bum]

Coming back to the "Dog Whistle racism" subthread here - for anyone who thinks that this is something that only happened during the Jim Crow days and nobody would ever think of doing any more, here's two modern instances:

- When Harold Ford. ran for Tennessee senate in 2006, the Republican National Committee paid for an ad showing a sexy blond mouthing "call me". Ford is black. His then girlfriend, now his wife, is blond.

- When John McCain ran for the Republican candidacy for President in 2000, he was hit by a smear campaign by his major primary opponent's organization that alleged that his adopted (and quite dark) Bengladeshi daughter was his illegitimate black daughter.

Naw, Republican operatives appealing to and exploiting racism? Couldn't happen in this century. Nope.

You have some real issues. We've acknowledged this before: Anyone who voted against Obama or any other Democrat is by definition, a racist! After all, why would anyone possibly vote against the chosen one - Obama?

Get some help (and some new arguments), your racist accusations are getting old!

[Bayou Bum]

Also before this election, there were "public service" fliers found circulating in low income neighborhood saying the police would be at the polls checking for outstanding warrants and collecting back rent. There were worse things I saw when Jessie Helms was running against a black man in North Carolina.

And don't forget how the Republicans want to bring back slavery if they ever get the majority again!

[jessicasimpson]

And don't forget how the Republicans want to bring back slavery if they ever get the majority again!

Naw, Hitler never had slaves.

[telkanuru]

Do we consider feudalism slavery?