> This statement doesn't mean anything useful.
That might be true if that wasn't a well known phrase that carries decades of examples behind it.
> It also describes every social safety net.
Social safety nets are not spending millions of billions of dollars on disasters, especially disasters we've been predicting since the dawn of industry. Social safety nets have upper bounds. Being able to handle these disasters is a benefit of society, yes. Social safety nets help people get on their feet, not prevent entire towns from being wiped out. It's disingenuous to imply America's social safety net (which it doesn't have) has anything to do with this.
When individuals create liability this large, they are jailed. When corporations do it, we pretend we never could have expected this outcome.
> It also describes every social safety net. Social safety nets are not spending millions of billions of dollars on disasters, especially disasters we've been predicting since the dawn of industry. Social safety nets have upper bounds. Being able to handle these disasters is a benefit of society, yes. Social safety nets help people get on their feet, not prevent entire towns from being wiped out. It's disingenuous to imply America's social safety net (which it doesn't have) has anything to do with this.
When individuals create liability this large, they are jailed. When corporations do it, we pretend we never could have expected this outcome.