Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It’s interesting. The BP oil spill in the US: it was basically determined, in a 15 minute meeting between maybe 2 politicians and a businessman, that BP would be fined massively, by a certain amount they would decide, but not destroyed. Then there was 2-4 years of process to perform that for the public.

Like at the end of the day, in reality, a judge with a law degree and very limited life experience doesn’t really know what should happen. The decision for big public fiascos - the oil rig said BP on it, the oil came out when it wasn’t supposed to, what is there to investigate? - is political.

The delayed justice here was not denied. You have to wonder, what is the downside of coming hard on a flammable cladding manufacturer?



I think this is a great point — these are fundamentally political judgements, and that’s probably how it should be


The Supreme Court reversed another triumph of political judgements - the indemnity of the Sacklers - so unfortunately, things seem to be trending away from pragmatic, politically driven solutions to problems and more towards the RNG of the Supreme Court.

The US is basically governed by playing Yogg-Saron now, and Clarence Thomas is the premium illustration.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: