zlacker

This is a strange take. So what if it is more effort. I remember as a member of my cooperatives board, I was reading a lot of what-ifs. One was that if spikes of ice fell down and killed someone on the street, and it happened because of neglilence on the boards side, we would absolutely be under the gun.

The board should be responsible. You don't get to make $200m a year and just brush hundreds of lives off as a whoops.

>>berghe+(OP)
> The board should be responsible. You don't get to make $200m a year and just brush hundreds of lives off as a whoops.

I don't think you understand how capitalism works.

>>whitem+D1
Is rule of law more effective in non-capitalist jurisdictions?

>>whitem+D1
We understand. He's just talking about how justice should work from a hypothetical perspective.

Hypothetically we all want a justice system to be based on justice but everyone is well aware that the system is at its heart capitalistic.

It's ok to discuss hypotheticals.

>>brigan+H3
Maybe, but capitalist rule of law makes hypothesis difficult to test.

Rule of law has probably been most influential under capitalist authoritarianism like Nazi Germany.

>>berghe+(OP)
> You don't get to make $200m a year and just brush hundreds of lives off as a whoops

That seems to be the most common occurrence in all fields...

>>whitem+An
Maybe? No examples?

If you're going to make an example of capitalism in particular then you should be able to justify it with non-capitalist examples. Are there some socialist or feudal states where the more powerful would lose a case like this?