Syyl'ara
Gallente
Intaki Prosperity Initiative
   |
Posted - 2011.03.10 23:57:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Syyl''ara on 11/03/2011 00:05:24
 Originally by: Senn Typhos
Anshar Incorporated would like to remind the public to carefully read over this statement before making responses in the future, as well as existing responses, so that questions can be answered succinctly once and only once.
Responses are not always answers. In this medium especially, one tends to find obfuscatory deflections more than actual substantive replies.
Quote:
It exists, and law enforcement has done nothing to change that. Neither have any capsuleer entities or militias managed to do more than dent it.
Law enforcement has been unable to break it, which is entirely different than saying it has "done nothing" to combat it. A share of the very revenue generated is used to purchase unjust rulings and lax enforcement by the authorities.
Quote:
It can either be left to twist its vines over the settlements closest to the equator, and spread its roots in the city, or it can be governed by an authority that understands its nature. We are taking that role because no one else has the potential or experience.
The "governing" authority you propose has only a monetary incentive to consider rather than the will and welfare of those who live in the area they wish to do business. As I alluded to above, if is the very fact this trade is conducted as part of organized criminal activity which lends to its resiliency. So yes, an un-"governed" trade would be much preferred as the criminals trafficking could then be more effectively brought to justice for the harm and abuse they have subjected their fellow citizens to.
Quote:
Local law enforcement have not done a great deal to curtail crime in the outskirts of the planets. Their wages will most likely remain unchanged, as will their progress. Perhaps Intaki should reconsider the allocation of their law enforcement funding.
So the fact that they are already stretched thin responding to the crime that already exists means it is ok to add more crime?
You've basically found half a dozen slightly different ways of repeating the age-old "two wrongs make a right" claim.
Imagine a wine vineyard. Already there exist numerous diseases, weeds that leach resources, and animal species who's existence threatens the health of the vines. You surmise that since these things already exist, it is ok for a competing vineyard down the road to pay thugs to show up and harass and intimidate the first vineyard's workers from addressing these threats. That they are not themselves literally tearing the vines from the rows doesn't erase their being very much responsible for the resulting damage.
Just a few quick examples of how arguments presented here are absurdly self-defeating:
"Its good for Placid, but we aren't responsible for the ill side-effects"
"There are no side effects, but for those who suffer them it is their own fault"
------------------------------------
"Since Placid is already in bad shape socioeconomically, our operations magically won't make it worse (or prevent its improvement)"
"If our operations are found to contribute to the plight, we don't care anyways as our only interest is making money"
Ishukone Prosperity Exchange
"Cooperation is the greater path than conflict."
Syyl'ara
Infrastructure Security Coordinator |