Chemical Makers Sue Over Rule to Rid Water of ‘Forever Chemicals’
nytimes.com
In practice, this means 3M is continuing to create harm from the risks they spent decades covering up
You are viewing a single comment
In practice, this means 3M is continuing to create harm from the risks they spent decades covering up
It sounds like their only argument is “it’s expensive”, which I find somewhat comforting because then it sounds like they at least agree with the science.
It’s a shame lawmakers don’t put stipulations in that they cannot trickle down those costs to the consumers. It’s not our fault, and we shouldn’t be put in a damned if you do and damned if you don’t position.
Can we form a class-action lawsuit to sue anybody who raises our rates over this? Legit question.
That's always their argument and try to spin it as a US problem.
"You'll remove a LOT OF JOBS and make everything more expensive if you ban child labor!"
The conservatives ethos in a nutshell.
And they knew a long time ago it would be expensive and did it anyway.