tennisball3

Your first bullet point here is basically entirely fiction, none of those accusations are factual.

The small number of people relevant to this land-grab are, very literally, casino operators. This wasn't a general commentary on Indian casinos, this is literally people who were born into the privileged position of inheriting generational wealth and privileged legal rights.

If you ignore that you've been conditioned through years of propaganda to see an overly simplified and exaggerated system of "Indians good, European immigrants bad", then this gets trickier when you realize you're basically arguing in favor of some trust fund kids to get more powerful because of who their great-grandparents were, a system which I'm confident you'd oppose if it were a different set of kids born feeling entitled to land, wealth and political power.

> Johnson & Johnson in its bid to use bankruptcy to block lawsuits from cancer victims

I'm not an expert, I really only know what Matt Levine has published in his Bloomberg newsletter, but this sounds like a very disingenuous description in order to stoke outrage. The bankruptcy proceedings were more about orderly management of a bunch of different lawsuits in different jurisdictions on different timelines.

At least by Levine's analysis, the victims were likely to fair better as a whole through the bankruptcy proceedings (all victims would be guaranteed a fair share) than without it (victims who got their court cases through the system faster might get more than later verdicts).

Or maybe Levine was unfairly charitable to them and the bankruptcy thing was purely to minimize total payments.