That's exactly how they operate - by trying to convince everyone that it's the inevitable result of the groundswell of public opinion in favor of aggressive regulation.
> to convince everyone that it's the inevitable result of the groundswell of public opinion in favor of aggressive regulation.
This wasn't aggressive regulation - it was removing regulation. Again, regulations would have helped.
The same things we've learned since the 1930s still apply. And when someone rolls back those regulations under claims it's "stifling profit or innovation" we end up in the same spot.
This wasn't aggressive regulation - it was removing regulation. Again, regulations would have helped.
The same things we've learned since the 1930s still apply. And when someone rolls back those regulations under claims it's "stifling profit or innovation" we end up in the same spot.