testa-j%osu-20@OHIO-STATE.ARPA.UUCP (08/17/86)
>From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL%MX.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU> > > From: Steve Walton <ametek!walton@csvax.caltech.edu> > > And manufacturers have a vested interest in hiding harmful > side-effects of products they sell. > > And their competitors have a vested interest in revealing these >effects. > Not necessarily. To take advantage of revealing what other companies are doing, a company would have to spend a lot of money in advertising. It might find it more profitable to produce their product even more cheaply, increasing the chance that it will also have harmful side effects to hide. Without some form of monitoring by an agency not concerned with making a profit, and with the *authority* to require safe products to be produced, the completely free market can evolve into a very dangerous place. -j.t. ------- -------
kfl%mx.lcs.mit.edu@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.UUCP (08/17/86)
From: ~joe testa~ <TESTA-J%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA> >From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL%MX.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU> > > And their competitors have a vested interest in revealing these >effects. Not necessarily. To take advantage of revealing what other companies are doing, a company would have to spend a lot of money in advertising. Not at all. One can simply tell the news media about the worms in your competitor's hamburger, and let them do all the work. It might find it more profitable to produce their product even more cheaply, increasing the chance that it will also have harmful side effects to hide. It might. And some THIRD competitor might expose BOTH of them, and take their shares of the market. There are also organizations such as Consumer's Union. ...Keith -------