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

All you’ve done is offer a contradiction and an ad hom, so why not bring a more substantial argument to the table for discussion.


Because they have reason (magazine) on their side


Maybe I misunderstood but pretty sure they’re saying the Reason article got it wrong. I’d like to hear why, and I’m likely to be sympathetic to an opposing view.

For example, I disagree with Reason that we should loosen FDA rules on something as critical as baby formula, but lowering tariffs on imports doesn’t seem like a terrible idea. On the other side, I think tariffs play an important role in protecting domestic industry that are vital to national security. So we don’t want Abbott to get shut down, but they do need to be severely punished.


You have distilled a better framework in two sentences than Reason could have in two issues of features.

Well done.


If baby formula is vital to national security, can you name anything that isn't also vital?


Sure, any luxury good.


Most of the apps in my phone?




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

Search: