[PatNY]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

In the case where companies are playing off the rules of one country against another, even a planet governed by excellent national politicians and legislators couldn't coordinate between nations to avoid all loopholes.

You don't need to avoid "all" loopholes. Just close up the one that is in question.

And European nations already coordinate amongst themselves through the EU. If the loophole situation were harmful enough, they should act to close it.

In the case of the US, why not blame voters for electing politicians who trumpet adherence to principle and attack the other party? You can't elect that kind and expect them to turn around and act non-partisan the next day.

If a voter wants their elected politicians to stick to their guns, what then would there be to blame them for? Most of the time I don't want them to act non-partisan if that would mean compromising principles.

Voters are definitely to blame for the government they end up with.

I also blame the framers of the constitution for creating a bicameral legislature. (Go Nebraska!) If different parties control them, as now, there's no way to pass anything without opening up the legislators to charges of flip-flopping.

I "blame" the founders here too -- for doing something right in this case. Bicameralism is good for checks and balances. If it matters enough, both parties bend and we end up with a compromise solution.

Consider the Amazon warehouse air-conditioning issue a few years ago. An Allentown newspaper found bad conditions for unorganized workers. Should Amazon have waited for Congress to pass a law making fines for hot facilities higher than the cost of improving the warehouses? Or was it more reasonable for Amazon to made correcting the situation a valid corporate function, as they did?

You're comparing a safety issue for workers with leveraging lawful advantageous tax strategies? Really? Wow. Those two issues are fundamentally different.

There's a place for the law, but there's also a place for public pressure, and there's even a place for comproming the bottom line in the cause of common decency even before there's public pressure.

I agree. And I think, for example, worker safety is an issue of common decency. Leveraging advantageous tax strategies fully within an established and legal system is not.

--Pat