sho - this article is clearly about politics. While almost all of us are interested in, and have opinions about politics, if we start posting them here, we'll quickly turn it into yet another ongoing internet flamewar about a subject that you can read about to your heart's content on other sites.
Hm. Well I agree completely, but I thought the main thrust of the article was to talk about democracy itself, a topic which is often covered here. I particularly liked the direct comparison to the free market - that it can only work as intended when the participants have, and are motivated to have, good information - an analogy I rather liked.
Where is democracy's equivalent to the SEC, and the FDA? Who ensures the consumer has the correct information? Who punishes those who would mislead? Maybe these aren't possible in a marketplace for ideas. But it's an intriguing idea.
The question of information - who has it, how they get it, why they aren't getting it, who this benefits - is of great interest to me, and I would have thought many of us; why is anyone here, if not to seek good information?
Anyway, I won't be offended if you flag it! I just thought it was interesting.
4 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 20.9 ms ] threadWhere is democracy's equivalent to the SEC, and the FDA? Who ensures the consumer has the correct information? Who punishes those who would mislead? Maybe these aren't possible in a marketplace for ideas. But it's an intriguing idea.
The question of information - who has it, how they get it, why they aren't getting it, who this benefits - is of great interest to me, and I would have thought many of us; why is anyone here, if not to seek good information?
Anyway, I won't be offended if you flag it! I just thought it was interesting.
HA!