> I hate to say this... but, why are you commenting if you don't know the legal details of NAFTA?
They've given a good hypothesis. Are you expecting commenters to only contribute to topics they can claim to be specialized experts in?
They've given a good hypothesis. Are you expecting commenters to only contribute to topics they can claim to be specialized experts in?
And wouldn't someone with a passing familiarity with NAFTA at least know about the "tantamount to appropriation" clause? I know this much, and that's just from a half-remembered required social studies class I took in public high school in the US, some twenty-odd years ago.
Of course I see a lot of wisdom on HN threads discussing subjects I’m not familiar with … but only because I can’t tell the difference between cynicism and wisdom in those cases.
You’re frustrated that someone would comment on a thorny legal issue while having no understanding of the law or knowledge of the specifics of NAFTA. But that’s how it is on every thread not related to software. See the hundreds of threads where software engineers suddenly became expert epidemiologists overnight for an example of this phenomenon.
I’m not sure what the alternative is. Certainly it isn’t just keeping quiet and not discussing anything we’re not experts in. Maybe sometimes it’s ok to speculate just for fun.
The last decades of politics have shown all over the world that modern politicians act primarily on the whims of those who line their pockets, which is way too often contrary to the best solutions for their constituents or the ability of the planet to support human life.
That cynicism, itself a symptom of the erosion of trust in democracy, as well as populist tendencies, doesn't come from nothing.
There was never an era where politicians didn’t prioritise their self interest above all else.
I think there is nothing wrong with saying your thing, if you do it in a humble way and you don't pretend to be an expert. It's called having a conversation.