3M is also in another lawsuit for defective earplugs supplied to the US military: https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/product-liability/3m-ea...
Additional info: https://www.millerandzois.com/products-liability/3m-combat-a...
3M heads to trial in ‘existential’ $143B forever-chemicals litigation
21–30 of 260 posts
Re: 3M heads to trial in ‘existential’ $143B forever-chemicals litigation
#22Re: 3M heads to trial in ‘existential’ $143B forever-chemicals litigation
#23> Financial research firm CreditSights estimates that 3M could ultimately be on the hook for nationwide PFAS cleanup costs of up to $142.7 billion. That’s almost triple the company’s $53 billion market capitalization, and that’s before any personal injury claims and other lawsuits. What does this actually mean? It's just showing off a big number without giving any real context. 3M is the only manufacturer of tons of…
Assuming those numbers are realized it would mean bankruptcy, essentially, and questions like this are pretty standard and well-thought-about there. IANAL but I think this is why Chapter 11 bankruptcy exists (where you keep the company going because that's valuable) vs Chapter 7 (where you liquidate it). I think the Purdue bankruptcy is similar where the company is somewhat being handed over to the people that were harmed, because that's more valuable to them than selling the company piecemeal and then distributing the proceeds.
Re: 3M heads to trial in ‘existential’ $143B forever-chemicals litigation
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh well that excuses all of the poisoning, clearly
disbanding this corporation doesn't undo decades of pollution either. I doubt very much that they're the only ones able to manufacture this stuff
>> disbanding this corporation doesn't undo decades of pollution either.
Yes, but it prevents them from harming the public like this in the future, and also serves as a very strong deterrent for others.
Re: 3M heads to trial in ‘existential’ $143B forever-chemicals litigation
#25Johnson and Johnson tried to spin up a subsidiary and shift all the blame to it for including asbestos in talcum powder for decades. Thankfully, the courts saw through the move and made them pay billions of dollars too
J&J ended up paying $9 billion but they still ended up being allowed to spin a subsidiary to hold that money and essentially take on the liability of future lawsuits or what happens when the money runs out and there are more claims.
What if this subsidiary has $1B in assets? Do they go bankrupt and not have to pay the rest of the $8B?
Re: 3M heads to trial in ‘existential’ $143B forever-chemicals litigation
#26I wonder what the role of this corporation has been in historically 'hiding away' (making the knowledge 'safe') the majority of "our" know-how around industrial scale chemistry?
I am curious about this because they did to chemistry what (? the nuclear bomb programmes?) did to physics?
This that I have seen happen against computer technology during my short time on earth so far (related: "war on general purpose computers").
...that for the sake of safety (you wouldn't want randos making TNT? then nuclear bomb... now computer malware or 'dangerous' AI tools?) a way is found to make knowledge inaccessible (for safety's sake)
on the level of reasoning i'm seeking, 3M is one of many examples of an older 'deeper' practice around knowledge, accessibility, government, organization-constructing, etc...
Re: 3M heads to trial in ‘existential’ $143B forever-chemicals litigation
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh well that excuses all of the poisoning, clearly
disbanding this corporation doesn't undo decades of pollution either. I doubt very much that they're the only ones able to manufacture this stuff
The point isn't to undo the past, it is to make it clear to other companies that if they lie about safety they will face an existential threat too.
Who are you people who feel compelled to defend mega corporations that screw people over? What is your psychology? What do you value in life? My goodness.
Re: 3M heads to trial in ‘existential’ $143B forever-chemicals litigation
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
disbanding this corporation doesn't undo decades of pollution either. I doubt very much that they're the only ones able to manufacture this stuff
>> disbanding this corporation doesn't undo decades of pollution either. Yes, but it prevents them from harming the public like this in the future, and also serves as a very strong deterrent for others.
or mabye we should be more honest and consider that maybe this is a way for the USA government to fill its coffers back up?
(rapping on another comment saying that there's a chance this is a way for the USA government to sell the 'manufacture capacity' that 3M is to other "greener" owners)
now that I type this out, I realize that this is perfectly consistent with the behavior of empires. the realization that the alleged 'pax romana' (stability and 'peace' for the roman empire) was built on stealing from 'barbaric' tribes and selling stuff to more 'civilized' owners in Rome.
Re: 3M heads to trial in ‘existential’ $143B forever-chemicals litigation
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are used in all kinds of products that I personaly use everyday from pans to dental floss. And the replacements are not better, they just dont have studies yet that prove they are toxic...
Oh well that excuses all of the poisoning, clearly
That's a pretty shitty response to an actual problem.
Companies don't need to prove the safety of things like this.
Look at bpa free. Most people don't even know that bpa free plastic tends to be just as bad, or potentially worse than bpa. The press doesn't give a shit I guess. Society went through its giant bpa panic and now it's tired of dealing with this so let's just ignore it and move onto the next thing. Ignorance is bliss.
Re: 3M heads to trial in ‘existential’ $143B forever-chemicals litigation
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
disbanding this corporation doesn't undo decades of pollution either. I doubt very much that they're the only ones able to manufacture this stuff
The point isn't to undo the past, it is to make it clear to other companies that if they lie about safety they will face an existential threat too. Who are you people who feel compelled to defend mega corporations that screw people over? What is your psychology? What do you value in life? My goodness.
There are millions of people all over the earth that genuinely believe "might makes right", or "greed is good", or "capitalism inherently results in meritocratic and technocratic allocation of resources so nothing that happens under capitalism can possibly be bad".
That's not even the least liberal worldviews widely held. Love thy neighbor and the golden rule and accountability are not universal