This is a genuine question.

I have a hard time with this. My righteous side wants him to face an appropriate sentence, but my pessimistic side thinks this might have set a great example for CEOs to always maintain a level of humanity or face unforseen consequences.

P.S. this topic is highly controversial and I want actual opinions so let’s be civil.

And if you’re a mod, delete this if the post is inappropriate or if it gets too heated.

        • comfy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          No it isn’t. Neither major party has used their power to fix this system. Both have had ample opportunity in the many past decades.

          Due to the dominance of the FPTP system’s spoiler effect and of the two-party system, we can’t reasonably expect a mass shift to third parties. Therefore, of the two viable parties, neither will change the system. No realistic voting behavior indicates support of the broken system - if anything the lowering voter turnout is a general indication that they don’t support the system.

        • granolabar@kbin.melroy.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          Voting is charade to provide the regime legitimacy. These people don’t represent the working class.

          You are being dense…

    • ZeroHora@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      Do you really believe you can win against an army of lawyers paid with an absurd amount of money? Not only that but what the CEO did is legal… is just inhumane

    • GeneralVincent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      Because crimes should be handled in a criminal court case with real consequences, not a civil case. But that’s not likely to happen.

      So if someone did sue them, and against all odds they won, and the money they received somehow properly compensated for their loss (i.e. a loved ones preventable death), then the company that extracts billions of dollars from Americans every year would lose a couple million. The company would be unaffected and have no meaningful consequences for their willfully unethical behavior. We’d have to have thousands of successful lawsuits to have meaningful consequences.