• Ilandar@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    No, we are not talking about people at all.

    The article is literally about individual people.

    I don’t feel sorry for people when they their voluntary, intentionally risky, actions have consequences. When you chose to forego risk-mitigation in order to recieve financial benefits, you’re making a choice. If that goes wrong, you literally only have yourself to blame.

    What happened to “we’re not talking about people”…?

    • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Would you prefer to argue the semantics, or the actual point?

      Someone intentionally, knowingly, drops their legal projections to increase their personal benefit. They stop acting as an individual legally, and start acting as a company. And then the consequences of that action happen.

      • Ilandar@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        What is your “actual point”? You keep referring to companies and telling me I’m not allowed to discuss the impact on individuals, despite the article, my original comment and every comment I’ve made since being focused on individuals, but then start randomly discussing individuals yourself when it suits you.

        This discussion has never been about whether individuals or companies are culpable for their actions. You are either not reading any of my replies or you are just straight up ignoring them because you find the concept of empathy too emotionally challenging to handle. You are increasingly sounding like someone who struggles with emotional self-regulation and copes by finding fault in those around them.