• @tal
    link
    English
    32
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    It’ll be competition with existing agricultural businesses. If you’re a rancher, you don’t want disruptive technology coming along and disrupting you out of business.

    As things stand today – and this has not been a constant over time, as their positions used to be reversed – the Republicans are the “rural” party, and the Democrats the “urban” party, so special interests involved with farming are gonna generally find a voice with the Republican Party.

    • @JovialMicrobial@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      4
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      So this issue is boiling down to a luddite-esque type of situation. Except this time it’s the rich business owners getting pissed instead of poor textile workers.

    • @voracitude@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      32 months ago

      Well sure, that’s probably the real reason… But with how moustache-twirlingly evil these fuckers seem to delight in being these days, can you say for certain it’s the only reason? 🧐

      • @tal
        link
        English
        5
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        probably the real reason

        That reason might be pretty significant as regards these laws, like the Florida one, holding up in court in that states have some constraints on what they can do to create protectionist laws that disrupt interstate trade.

        Like, if you’re a big beef-producing state, the beef producers can’t say “okay, we’re gonna block out-of-state competition and keep our state as a protected market against beef producers who operate in more-urban areas”.

        I commented the other day on the potential of a Dormant Commerce Clause case challenging them.

        • @voracitude@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          3
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Oh, I was just being facetious for a laugh. I know these sorts of decisions are just functionally evil driven by financial motivations, rather than outright intentional malice for the sake of it.