Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
Well, the Tobacco scientists did have more information and new sooner that tobacco was likely causing cancer than the rest of academia.
Yes, you still need intelligent regulation but industry scientists have more resources at their disposal than their academic counterparts. If you can forge a real partnership to try to solve problems at the regulator level rather than a continuous adversarial relationship, society will be better off. Lower cost goods while maintaining environmental protections.
I don't think this is Pruits goal though.
I also don't like your analogy it isn't putting the fox in the henhouse. Its letting the farmer in the hen house. Now he might kill the goose that lays the golden eggs in order to profit however his goal of extracting wealth is in the farms benefit and some level of impact unlike the fox who is just a cancer on the well being of the farm. The fox in the hen house analogy is part of the problem in creating this adversarial relationship between regulators and corporations which is not productive.
|
I'm pretty sure the fox analogy is pretty apt, actually. Given that Exxon was conducting unprecidented climate change research
forty years ago and then spent millions of dollars to muddy up the results of that data... I'd say they're being knowingly and willingly hurtful to this planet.
It's a pain to quote while on my phone, but this entire article is pretty damning.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...-40-years-ago/