| > If you discount all the hypothetical environmental costs that at best guess are just that, guesses That VW's behavior caused some environmental impact is not a guess. The guess is only to the extent of the damage. > it would have been cheaper for VW if they would have been killing the consumers of their cars. That is ridiculous. The death toll would be many times 9/11. USG would've seized by force every asset inside its borders and a lot (or all) outside of its borders. Not only of VW but of any contractor that might've may had something to do with it. For starters. > Uber is constantly praised for skirting or directly violating state or local government laws And also constantly criticized, and sometimes shut down. But more to the point, violating different government regulations (by extension, different laws) has different outcomes. Why is that surprising/concerning, again? Federal environmental regulations SHOULD be treated more seriously than local taxi rules. > This is the government's heavy hand making an example of VW and it's violation of regulation. On only his can we agree. The message is clear: fines for willfully ignoring environmental regulation are not a cost of business. |