View Single Post
Old 01-01-2017, 08:27 PM   #45
CorsiHockeyLeague
Franchise Player
 
CorsiHockeyLeague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by iggy_oi View Post
I would agree that the government could done more to explain the costs to the public, but I don't believe their handling of it gives companies a free pass to gouge, they are just as capable of showing exactly what the breakdowns of their costs will be and making that public, does anyone think they will be making their books public?
They didn't just do a poor job of explaining it, they've been blatantly lying about it. A more diplomatic way of putting it would be "spin", but it amounts to the same thing.

No, I don't think companies will be revealing sensitive information to the public at large that would harm their interests vis a vis their competitors and likely breach non-disclosure provisions in the myriad agreements they maintain with many of the parties they do business with on a regular basis. That just doesn't seem all that likely to me, for some reason I can't quite put my finger on. But then, they aren't funded entirely by the tax dollars levied against that same public and have no duty to be transparent. That could be why.

Your pre-existing biases and tendency to give government a pass while treating business as essentially the devil is so unbelievably boring at this point. You opened with a two line post that fundamentally misunderstood basic accounting principles, to the surprise of (I assume) no one at all. Must you ruin all threads tangentially related to the carbon tax?
__________________
"The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
CorsiHockeyLeague is offline   Reply With Quote