Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 09:46am PT
|
"the price we must pay for more people assumes that the marginal cost of those extra regulations is less than their marginal benefit"
that's so silly,
the costs ARE less than the benefits, lol
We have two magnitudes (x100!!!) more people now than just eight generations ago. It would be chaos and bloodletting if we didn't have a comparable regulation as we do today. Where is your ecological sense of these things?
That people could ignore these numbers - and the differences that result or could result from them - is as shallow thinking as it gets.
How often we reference our Founding Fathers, the 2nd Amendment and our country back then. A country of literally 2.4M. Size of S.F. lol
..
A contrary argument could be... Well if government were reduced by 90% say, then population pressures would manifest in other ways, regulatory pressures would come about in other ways, there would probably then be increased quarrels, skirmishes, riots, violence, etc and in the end population numbers would be reduced say 90% (culling) to around 34M, a much more reasonable number for OUR country in accordance with MY values. Is this YOUR solution?
|
|
kattz
climber
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 09:54am PT
|
"If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain"
--enough said.
By the way, time to arrest illegal alien criminals who're allowed to speak at DNC convention, throw them in jail and deport them.
The foul and digusting circus that this convention is only confirms what these people really are: corrupt and immoral.
Hey, DNC have illegals speaking at your convention?
This just cost a few percent for Hillary polls. You can't really keep parading your hatred of the law around like this.
They want to give voting rights to non-citizens? Democratic party transgressions against the law must not go on forever, that's for sure.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 09:55am PT
|
Though they are obviously related, I don't know that the need for more regulation is primarily about population growth as it is the unbelievable increase in the complexity of everything in our daily lives.
Our food, the medications & healthcare we receive, the wide variety of interests and actions that impact the environment, our financial system, and on and on and on.....
All of these things are far more complicated in the way that they function than they were 240 years ago. Regulation logically should diversify and expand commensurately,
|
|
Gerg
Trad climber
Calgary
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 09:56am PT
|
USA= awesome rock, comical politics
I can't wait for when Kim Kardashian is in the running.
Trump is so friggin hilarious like buddy up in North Korea funny.
(both have funny hair too)
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 09:58am PT
|
Kattz, if you are going to rant about how much smarter you conservatives are, at least try to form a cohesive sentence with reasonable spelling and grammar.
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 09:58am PT
|
Maybe you'd like to see our national parks under less regulation.
Maybe you'd like to see our banking systems under less regulation.
Maybe you'd like to see our foods and drugs under less regulation.
Do you think Yosemite is well regulated? I'd say it's a fine example of regulation being politicized. Of cronyism.
Bank regulation? Maybe you don't choose to view Fanny and Freddie as regulators. They certainly tilted the playing field to the profit of some and the losses of others.
Food and drugs? FDA just striped the meaning out of the label "Grass Fed". Now you can feed a cow grass for a week or two, then send it too the fed lot and pump it full of corn, hormones and antibiotics and sell it as "grass fed." How about the label "All Natural". And you know of course that Clinton is owned by Monsanto.
How do you think Fed regulators will rule on GMO foods now?
moveon.org/sign/hillary-clinton-its-time
organicconsumers.org/news/video-hilary-clinton-endorses-gmos-solution-focused-crop-biotechnology
My point? There is a big difference between more regulation and smart regulation. And if you don't think the regulators can be and often are corrupt I think you're naive. Who really owns Yosemite?
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 10:03am PT
|
apogee, it's not either-or, it's both. Both increasing numbers (one factor) and increasing complexities and powers (one factor) that necessarily demand more regulation, regulatory control (one way or another).
...
So improve the regulations, clean them up. Continue to fight corruption where it exists. But along the way (a) don't ignore basic human nature, you gotta work that into the thinking and management - and (b) don't imagine you can reduce government size and costs (not to zero as you rightly say that's often caricatured) but even by 30 - 50 per cent - it's just not realistic.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 10:07am PT
|
Way to go Radical!!!!
Awesome!!!!
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 10:09am PT
|
Hopefully the argument will some day become about "wise regulation" rather then more or less regulation. Yes I do believe that its possible for government to create wise regulation. I believe that its rare and requires something that most here don't believe in, so I believe that we will continue to fumble along. We are in quite the pickle.
We need wisdom and vision. I don't see much of that in government or private industry. Government is a reflection of our current state of consciousness. That statement does not speak to individuals as individuals can rise above the general consciousness. Its means that our general over all consciousness is still pretty low.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 10:10am PT
|
That's true, HFCS, but ksolem's view is true as well: regulation can be done effectively and efficiently, with less corruption in the process. This isn't zero-sum...but it could work smarter, rather than just throwing a bunch of new, conflicting laws & bureaucracies at the problem.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 10:10am PT
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 09:14am PT
I overheard a conversation where one guy was saying that ISIS was the biggest threat to the United States. Personally, I don't walk out the door everyday thinking that ISÍS is going to kill me. Should I?
This.
The problem is that once fear takes over, rational thinking escapes. That's just the way our brains are wired.
I don't think people are downplaying that ISIS is an evil organization doing many evil things, but people should worry a lot more about reckless drivers than ISIS.
Sadly, trump is a following a familiar yet successful strategy for dictators and wanna be dictators to get power: scare the day lights out of the populace, scapegoat others, then say that "I alone" can fix your problems
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 10:13am PT
|
Remember this?
[Click to View YouTube Video]
There is not a liberal America and a conservative America—there is the United States of America. There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America—there's the United States of America.
Here we are... after 7 1/2 years of Barack Obama at the helm... more divided than ever. Or at least since the Vietnam era.
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 10:15am PT
|
Edward T, so you fully blame Obama for the division? Do you not see the divisiveness in both parties? and in the media..
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 10:17am PT
|
ISÍS created by CIA, Mossad, Saudia Arabia & supported by Turkey.
Created by western corrupt powers as proxy terrorists to control western corporate interests.
Hillary loons are clueless as always ......
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 10:17am PT
|
Yep, the issue of racism is deep in this country, and has existed since its inception 240 years ago. Did you really expect a POTUS to change that in 7 years?
|
|
Gerg
Trad climber
Calgary
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 10:20am PT
|
Wake up, people, you're empowering a tyrant!
So true.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 10:21am PT
|
What are these hostile actions toward businesses specifically??????????
And you claim that they are 100% due to Obama's policies?????
and what environmental regulations are causing our economy so much trouble?
Please respond with some back up.
Because these claims have zero bearing in reality
I have neither the space nor the time - and the readers of this thread have no interest - in a comprehensive catalog of this administration's hostile actions toward business, so I'll just catalog a few of the many examples. As a preface, however, most of these actions came as a result of appointments Obama made to the various regulatory agencies that run our lives:
Labor: Threatening Boeing with a federal lawsuit if it chose to produce a new aircraft in a right-to-work state, Changing the definiion of exempt employees, NLRB purporting to act with illegal recess appointments, enactment of the "ambush election rule," and expanding many decades of precedent in areas such as the joint employment rule;
Environmental: Holding the Keystone pipeline hostage for six years before denying the permit, Imposing the Clean Power Plan without consideration of costs compared with benefits, EPA's illegal lobbying of citizen input on water rules, including, but not limited to, anti-farmer billboards, a general history of imposing rules with no consideration of marginal costs and benefit;
Financial: Dodd-Frank and CFPB rules and regulations, including but not limited to provisions in Reg. X that prohibit starting the foreclosure process until borrowers are more than 120 days delinquent (to those unfamiliar with foreclosure law, in California it takes about five months after you start the foreclosure process to complete it), Using Operation Choke Point to force lawful activity out of business, Extorting financial institutions for alleged wrongs against depositors and investors, and using the proceeds to fund anti-business groups rather than to provide relief to the parties allegedly wronged;
Legal: Stonewalling actions by groups seeking information to question regulations or actions with which they disagree (see, e.g., Norcal Tea Party Patriots v. IRS (6th Cir., 2016)) for a description of the general M.O.), Suing for-profit institutions for actions that it ignores if done by non-profit institutions, Enacting and defending policies such as the "anti-inversion rules" without legislative authority, while ignoring the tax rates that cause those inversions, and engaging in the extortion mentioned in the financial, labor and environmental sections, above.
In each of these areas, this administration has acted as if costs businesses incur don't matter, and in a way that imposes the same costs, regardless of scale, on all businesses. This has effectively hit small, independent business the hardest.
Again, this is merely the tip of the tip of the iceberg. This administration's actions would lead an objective observer to conclude that the administration wants to destroy private business. The lack of investment and the consequent anemic recovery stem directly from actions such as these, and this administration bears full responsbility for them.
John
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 10:26am PT
|
"Moreover, by placing as much authority as we have now in the hands of the bureaucrats, we have drastically increased the transactions costs of changing a bad decision. Even if we elected a Republican congress with 70% majorities in the House and Senate, and a Republican presidient, it would take years of litigation to undo the regulations already in place."
Moreover, these additional points, put forth above (last page), are just as silly. Standard Republican mindset, it is.
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2016 - 10:38am PT
|
So improve the regulations, clean them up. Continue to fight corruption where it exists. But along the way (a) don't ignore basic human nature, you gotta work that into the thinking and management - and (b) don't imagine you can reduce government size and expenditures (not by zero as you rightly say) but even by 30 - 50 per cent - it's just not realistic.
I knew we'd find some common ground. But I'll continue to raise my suspicion of government spending. I can't sign on to the idea that more spending = more effective government. Of course some things cost lots of $, but how the gov spends our tax money is both wasteful and corrupt in many ways.
The solar power industry is a suitable example. The gov provides tax incentives and subsidies to companies which install large solar farms in the desert. I've done some reading on these projects, and it appears that dust and sand gathering on the panels (where there is no water to clean them), cuts their efficiency. And experts (I am not one) seem to agree that the best use of solar power is at or near where it is used. But the gov is spending our money on big projects which are inefficient. Why?
IMO if we can get gov to eliminate wasteful, stupid, and corrupt spending we'll be a big step toward a less intrusive and smaller (and smarter) government. How do we do it? For starters enact a rule requiring that bills passed by Congress can only contain legislation which is relevant to the actual content of the bill. A huge amount of wasteful (pork) spending gets through without public scrutiny in the form of riders.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!