Yeah I think I agree. The law should be: if you can’t positively confirm it’s clean, you can’t use it.
We should have standards for the treatment of people, and strive not to participate in or reward those who treat people in unacceptable ways.
Totally agree.
It’s not good for a country to create an unfair marketplace. And it is an unfair marketplace when rules which acutely affect only certain people drastically for the good of all, are implemented too quickly to adapt to without major setbacks.
Just saying it should be phased in, to minimize local economic tearing.
Totally disagree.
Fines/tariffs/etc. are just cost of doing business for big business. Slowly enforcing regulation gives companies time to hedge, shuffle, and deflect without actually doing anything. Consequences should be hard and fast. Economies be damned. If an economy can’t stand on its own without companies acting ethically, or with them being punished for it, then it shouldn’t stand at all.
intensely_human@lemm.ee 6 months ago
These aren’t “consequences”. These are new rules we’re imposing on good people.
The fact you view this as a war between you and the companies being regulated means I hope you are never a regulator. You see it as an operation to take them down. That’s fucked up.
davehtaylor@beehaw.org 6 months ago
Wait. We’re talking about making sure a company isn’t using slave labor in their supply chain, and creating consequences for them doing so. And that’s a problem for you? You think it’s fucked up that a company forced to abide by rules preventing them from using slave labor?
intensely_human@lemm.ee 6 months ago
I’ve already explained my position and you’ve already demonstrated an unwillingness to interpret what I say generously. You’ll get no more conversation with me until you stop trying to trap me.
davehtaylor@beehaw.org 6 months ago
WTF are you talking about, “trapping” you?
If you can’t give a full-throated condemnation of a company using slave labor, then I don’t know what your position is supposed to be.