As for actually doing research, thinking about it, and bothering up to come up with a proposal... I guess nobody actually cares THAT much.
That's not what's happening here. These are people who use their immense power and resources to warp our bureaucracy to protect and enrich themselves. They don't face real consequences because the system is designed to shield them from accountability.
Who's they?
It's so easy to hand-wave about "them" and "the system," but I don't see how you're helping people unless you're helping to make concrete proposals or helping to identify specific policies by specific people that need to be punished and/or prevented in the future.
Spare us the snark, it's not helpful. You should know that one cannot just draw up a proposal to bring criminal charges; only a very small number of people have the legal authority and resources to do that.
People come up with proposals on how to fix the system all of the time. If you haven't heard of them, that's due to a gap in your reading, not because proposals don't exist. The issue comes down to actually getting people in power who want to make these kinds of changes, something that doesn't happen very often.
But again, tons of people have researched this stuff. The problem is that I cannot personally bring a criminal charge against Richard Sackler. Which is why your "people just want to be mad on the internet" attitude is extremely obnoxious. The problem isn't that what needs to be done in these cases isn't known, the problem is that the people who have the power continue to do what we don't want them to do.
>> the problem is that the people who have the power continue to do what we don't want them to do.
If an outraged public has clear alignment on what needs to happen, a lot of times this can force the hand of government.
On the other hand, being unspecifically frustrated isn't enough. A lot of issues are very complex (e.g. bailout), and culpability is spread thin, and laws are limiting. If there isn't alignment on the facts, then some irrelevant figure will be scapegoated to sate the public anger.
Yes, people are angry. Yes, people often scapegoat on complex issues. No, the actual problem is not that we just want to get angry without actually doing any of the work to propose a solution.
Exactly, thank you for proving my point. I, like 90% of Americans, do not care enough about the opioid epidemic to do any research. We care so little, that we don't even know Richard Sackler's name. I have a million things to care about in my personal life, and a million other pieces of news I could worry about instead.
It's not a personal attack, I'm not sure why you're getting so offended about it, it's simply human nature.
The other thing you seem not to grok is that if 90% of Americans said Richard Sackler needs to be prosecuted it would happen. However, maybe 10% of the population knows that name.
So, in conclusion, back to my original point -- If you ever want more than 10% of the population to know the name, you have to bring him up in your discussions, because 90% of us don't care enough.
You directly told people here that it was their fault they’d not done the effort to do some research and propose something, and that they didn’t really care about this issue. If you don’t understand why people will respond very poorly to that, then my genuine sympathies go out to you, because that was a personal attack.
You didn't get singled out, I think if you reread this thread in that context you'll see you're getting kinda emotional, but no worries bud.
The next step with any issue (black lives matter, big bank bailout) is to take a complex systemic issue and find specific, realistic changes that can help with the problem, before people get apathetic/resign.
The problem with white collar crime isn't a lack of ideas, it's a lack of will among prosecutors and judges to punish it.