Archived version: https://archive.ph/bE9Vc
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20240126032128/https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68102511
Archived version: https://archive.ph/bE9Vc
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20240126032128/https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68102511
You’re right, we should do nothing and let these irresponsible companies keep it.
Or maybe give it to the people who were actually affected by it? The ones in who’s names the judgement was made?
It literally says it’s a punitive assessment for emotional damages… I don’t think the government got its feelings hurt…
I agree with your first point. But the only thing most companies understand is money. A punitive fine will save lives and prevent future negligence.
A punitive assessment for the emotional damage from deaths and destruction of personal property on a grand scale, including the environment the damaged parties live in, is entirely appropriate.
Levying it under that pretense, but putting it in a discretionary fund under purview of government is essentially a 100% tax on the damages done to the victims.
Claiming it will be used to benefit those victims is a whitewash… It never goes to the victims unless it’s awarded to them.
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with the punitive assessment, my objection is purely to the recipient.