> it's literally the cost of buying goods in a variety of places.

Not an accurate analogy. This is a fine on sales, not expenditures. It would be like fining you 6% of your pre-tax income, not doubling sales tax on things you buy.

> I'd strongly argue that 6% will not correct bad behavior.

If the government threatened to take 6% of your pre-tax income if you violated a set of laws, would you laugh it off and refuse to change your behavior? Or would you make an effort to not incur those fines?

▲

skeptic_ai a day ago | parent [-]

Laugh it off. Especially when I can earn a ton more off doing it anyway. 6% is cost of doing business. I’ll earn 50% more by doing the sketchy shit.

	▲	Aurornis a day ago \| parent [-]
		These laws are not covering things that increase sales by 50% If that was true, sales would fall to 67% of the pre-law sales. That doesn’t happen. It’s a silly claim. It would be like the government taking 6% of your total compensation for breaking the speed limit. You could try to speed everywhere to save time but if you get caught it’s going to hurt. It’s not a “increase sales 50%” scenario. You’re arguing against something that doesn’t exist.