| ▲ | bearjaws a day ago |
| Needs a 0 added, $160B feels fair. Mesothelioma was $35B in 90s money, so about 3x that today. Companies keep getting away with this "cost of doing business" fines, the justice department keeps failing at its duties. The fines either need to wipe out these companies to the point the share holders hold the leadership accountable or nothing will change. |
|
| ▲ | jimmyjazz14 a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| The difference is asbestos clearly and directly caused harm, the social media addiction stuff stand on pretty dubious science to say the least. |
| |
| ▲ | bearjaws a day ago | parent | next [-] | | The problem wasn't as simple as it caused harm, it was the companies knew it caused harm and did nothing. Just like how Meta, it's staff and leadership all knew they were making decisions that harmed people, and did nothing to stop it while profiting immensely. | | | |
| ▲ | jplusequalt a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | >the social media addiction stuff stand on pretty dubious science to say the least. There are multiple studies showing that social media use leads to worse mental health in users. |
|
|
| ▲ | datakan a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Punishable by fine just means its legal for a price. Its disgusting |
| |
| ▲ | darkwizard42 a day ago | parent [-] | | Well, they are being asked to make changes as well, which presumably prevents the damage. It can be argued the changes don't go far enough so maybe "pay fine, reduce harm, but harm still permitted..." |
|
