Stregulation

Jim Lynch wrote:

I’m coining a new word — Stregulation. As bad as burdensome taxes, Stregulation — job killing, freedom robing, nanny-state strangulation through regulation — must be addressed.

I’ll let you go to Jim’s original to read the whole thing, but, his next to last paragraph says:

Other things are smaller, but every bit as intrusive into how we can live our lives and what we can do with our property and things we own. How far have we fallen as a nation when the government can tell us what kind of light bulbs we can use?

Mr Lynch addresses just how intrusive regulations are these days, and how they are getting worse. Hoagie is talking about starting a new business; fortunately, it’s near, but not in, Philadelphia, where things would be even worse, but I’m sure he could tell us all about the stregulation he will face.

69 Comments

  1. Thanks for the link, Dana. This is something that has been on my mind for some time. Taxes are easy to see – you get out your pay stub or pay $1.05 for that $.99 item – you know about taxes. Granted, some taxes are better hidden (think gasoline taxes), but stregulations are the ninjas of job killers.

  2. Stregulation is a natural response to unbridled capitalism which has little regard for the social needs of their surroundings. Without the protagonist there would be no antagonist in response. Have you Righties ever given this a thought? Answer: NO! You folks are in it strictly for yourselves, in my opinion. This attitude of yours is quite apparent in this microcosm known as CSPT! There are alternatives: Look at the Germans, or the Danes, or the Finns.

  3. Just admit it, Perry. You’re a socialist and as such, you have absolutely no understanding how the business model works, nor how the US became the wealthiest, freest nation in the world, past or present.

  4. Perry wrote:

    Stregulation is a natural response to unbridled capitalism which has little regard for the social needs of their surroundings. Without the protagonist there would be no antagonist in response. Have you Righties ever given this a thought? Answer: NO! You folks are in it strictly for yourselves, in my opinion. This attitude of yours is quite apparent in this microcosm known as CSPT! There are alternatives: Look at the Germans, or the Danes, or the Finns.

    You have, perhaps unintentionally :) , corroborated Mr Lynch’s thesis, through your use of the word “stregulation.” Did you go to Mr Lynch’s original, and read it? He noted how the Sunshine State insisted on maintaining licensing requirements on interior designers:

    Their argument is that only a licensed and regulated interior designer has the knowledge to keep you safe from flammable wall coverings, toxic building materials, and public toilets with a center line too close to the wall. Why, without a regulated interior designer, architects and contractors would be hanging drapes made out of oil soaked rags!

    Well, unless someone did choose to make draperies out of oil-soaked rags, the items people would normally buy at Home Despot or wherever are already as flame-retardant as they can be for the application; this was just an effort to keep prices higher. “(U)nbridled capitalism” might allow an unlicensed interior designer to open up shop in Orlando, and charge less, and all that consumers would be risking is an ugly room . . . something they risk with a licensed designer as well.

    We’ve had this discussion before: people are already switching to compact fluorescent light bulbs, where the use of such is appropriate, over incandescent bulbs, because they believe them to be a better buy. Why, then, must the nanny state try to use the power of the state to compel people to switch to CFLs? As I wrote then:

    So why do the meddling statists in Washington and Sacramento and Harrisburg and wherever think that they have to force us to switch? I think it’s smarter to change over, and I think that it’s probably smarter if my friends across the street and Yorkshire and Mayor Mike Sofranko change over as well, but I also know that, if they don’t, it’s still none of my damned business. I also think that it would be smarter if they quit smoking and cut back on salt and ate more vegetables and drank less alcohol, but those, too, are none of my business. And it shouldn’t be the state’s business, either.

    That is probably the most galling thing about our friends on the left. Deep down, I’m sure that most of them really want only the best for this country, even if we don’t always agree on what is best. But so many of them seem to think that, if something is good for us, why we ought to use the power of government to force everybody to do what’s good for us.

    Progressives are the enemies of freedom, and liberalism is the enemy of liberty.

  5. Perry wrote:

    Without the protagonist there would be no antagonist in response. Have you Righties ever given this a thought? Answer: NO!

    Yes, we have, actually, though you don’t see it. Taking the CFL bulb issue as an example again, consumers were already switching to CFLs, freely, of their own accord. Yet, to some busybodies, they weren’t doing so fast enough, and [horrors!] not everyone seemed to be making the switch at all. The Protagonist was liberty, the right of people to take free choices, so y’all had to come up with the antagonist, state power to coerce the choices you thought were better.

    You folks are in it strictly for yourselves, in my opinion. This attitude of yours is quite apparent in this microcosm known as CSPT! There are alternatives: Look at the Germans, or the Danes, or the Finns.

    If supporting freedom is defined as being “in it strictly for (ourselves),” then yup, sure am!

    If you find that Germany or Denmark or Finland are such superior places, I would point out to you that there are no emigration restrictions in this country. Heck, since Social Security is portable, you can move to Finland and still receive your Social Security checks!

  6. “Just admit it, Perry. You’re a socialist and as such, you have absolutely no understanding how the business model works, nor how the US became the wealthiest, freest nation in the world, past or present.”

    Right, John, but what about the future?

  7. “Well, unless someone did choose to make draperies out of oil-soaked rags, the items people would normally buy at Home Despot or wherever are already as flame-retardant as they can be for the application; this was just an effort to keep prices higher. “(U)nbridled capitalism” might allow an unlicensed interior designer to open up shop in Orlando, and charge less, and all that consumers would be risking is an ugly room . . . something they risk with a licensed designer as well.”

    Right, Dana. And then there is the lead in paint story.

    Capitalists in general are unwilling to go the more expensive yet safer route unless forced by an outside independent force, motivated by concern for the ordinary citizen and their families, which is what an enlightened government can provide. Yet you Righties fight this tooth and nail. Where are you coming from on this, but for ideology’s sake. That is neither intelligent nor wise.

  8. And then, Dana, you chose to use the incandescent bulb story, which is not analogous, because in addition to informing, a proper role of regulators, coercion was chosen where coercion should not have been chosen in that particular case, since there are fixtures in which only tungsten bulbs will fit.

    But back to the lead in paint story. Do you think if was a mistake to ban the use of lead in paint where the possibility of ingestion by living organisms is possible?

    One rule cannot be written for all cases. But in each case, reasoned thinking needs to be applied to the task, not the ‘one rule fits all’ ideological approach which you seem to depend upon, blindly!

  9. Right, John, but what about the future?

    If we can rid ourselves of Leftist/Socialist ideology and return to the Constitution — as the TEA Party is working very hard to do — our future can still be as the shining light on the hill. But if the Leftist/Socialist take-over of the nation and rejection of the Constitution continues as it has done since at least Wilson and had been dramatically expanded under FDR and explosively expanded under Obama, then America’s best days are indeed behind her.

  10. “If you find that Germany or Denmark or Finland are such superior places, I would point out to you that there are no emigration restrictions in this country. Heck, since Social Security is portable, you can move to Finland and still receive your Social Security checks!”

    Here we have the same old same old tired response which has no relevance to solving problems, unless you think getting rid of me solves a problem. :) Oh wait, that’s what John H, Hube, and Eric would tell you! :) :)

  11. “If we can rid ourselves of Leftist/Socialist ideology and return to the Constitution — as the TEA Party is working very hard to do — our future can still be as the shining light on the hill. But if the Leftist/Socialist take-over of the nation and rejection of the Constitution continues as it has done since at least Wilson and had been dramatically expanded under FDR and explosively expanded under Obama, then America’s best days are indeed behind her.”

    So in your book, John, Reagan and Bush-43 were also “Leftist/Socialist” leaning. This in itself shows how extreme your thinking is, to the point where, as I noted before, you do not even look out for your own well-being. There is something seriously akilter here!

  12. Perry, one of these days you’ll run out of straw for your straw-man brigades. I hope you applied for your open-fire permits what with all that torching you do.

  13. “Perry, by your own words and viewpoint, I’m sure you can’t figure out what’s wrong in this video:”

    I don’t recognize the scene, and there is no sound. Go figure!

  14. “Perry, one of these days you’ll run out of straw for your straw-man brigades. I hope you applied for your open-fire permits what with all that torching you do.”

    No straw man here, John, I just used logic to extend from your expression of your right wing extremist view. Do you understand what a straw man is: A hypothetical raised then attacked, as if it is an attack on a person’s stated position, or on the person. That did not occur here with the Reagan/Bush-43 remark. Sounds good though, doesn’t it John?

    The straw man you use against me all the time is to label me and then attack your label, thus avoiding the actual position which I have taken. This is an indicator of one who really does not wish to debate. Another indicator is when personal attacks are used incessantly in place of debating the issue. And finally, one more indicator: Dealing in a generalization instead of addressing the specifics of the issue. Both you and Hube behave in this manner on this blog, thus making yourselves ineffective debaters.

    If you think I am hypocritical and do the same as you two do, give me some examples.

  15. Perry, shove your declaration of my ignorance up your smug, elitist ass! I know what a straw-man is! You use them all the time! And you used a straw-man to attack my statement! And your smug, elitist “I’ll lern ya, dern ya” bullshit directly above also contains your typical ad hominem attack!

    Seriously, Perry, you can take your smug, elitist ass and sit and spin!

  16. “Perry, shove your declaration of my ignorance up your smug, elitist ass! I know what a straw-man is! You use them all the time! And you used a straw-man to attack my statement! And your smug, elitist “I’ll lern ya, dern ya” bullshit directly above also contains your typical ad hominem attack!

    Seriously, Perry, you can take your smug, elitist ass and sit and spin!”

    Ok, John, you tell me what a straw man is, and tell me how my Reagan/Bush-43 statement is a straw man.

    Moreover, I quickly point out that this statement of yours makes my point: “The straw man you use against me all the time is to label me and then attack your label, thus avoiding the actual position which I have taken. ”

    You just did exactly that. Next thing you’ll reach for your gun, so to speak!

    And please, show me the ad hominem you allege I used.

    PS: My speaker is not working, and I cannot figure out why, since I used it earlier this morning.

  17. Your “Reagan/Bush-43 statement” is most clearly not my position, nor has it ever been. Thus, straw-man. Anybody with half the reasoning capability of a middle-schooler could tell you that. Trust me, Perry, you never want to debate me or any other Conservative in person in a public forum; you’d only get laughed off the stage because you have virtually no skill in logic. But you are indeed quite skilled in redefining words to mean their exact opposite as you so frequently do here.

    Seriously, Perry, go take a flying leap.

  18. That’s no straw man, John. Here is what you said: “But if the Leftist/Socialist take-over of the nation and rejection of the Constitution continues as it has done since at least Wilson and had been dramatically expanded under FDR and explosively expanded under Obama, then America’s best days are indeed behind her.”

    Doesn’t that time period include Reagan and Bush-43? Of course it does, so my statement is a logical extension, as I claimed before: “So in your book, John, Reagan and Bush-43 were also “Leftist/Socialist” leaning.”

    Actually, it’s a trivial matter, but worth while just to prove a point. And btw, you haven’t shown me the ad hominem you alleged I used.

    Speaking of ad hominems:

    “Anybody with half the reasoning capability of a middle-schooler could tell you that…. Seriously, Perry, you can take your smug, elitist ass and sit and spin! …. Perry, shove your declaration of my ignorance up your smug, elitist ass! “

    I guess it is OK for you to use them, John, but not for any of the rest of us. Now who is it that you were calling an elitist here?

    “Seriously, Perry, go take a flying leap.”

    No way, John, not when you are so obtuse that you need to be called out on your partisan shenanigans!

    Now please don’t yell at your daughter or get impatient with your grandson just because you are angry at me!

    I’m outta here!

  19. “Hoagie is talking about starting a new business; “

    I meant to congratulate Hoagie for his decision, and to wish him luck and good fortune in this endeavor, and a wish that stregulation does not cause any undue hinderences or headaches. I am also happy for the employees that Hoagie-John will be hiring, because knowing him to the extent that I do, and how he looked after them in his previous enterprise, I conclude that he is an exemplary employer!!!

  20. I’m Will,

    Riiiiiight. Apart from, you know, the intelligence, the education, the charm and the good looks, you’re just like Matt Damon playing Will Hunting…

  21. Well perry, no sooner are stregulations mentioned, stregulatons strike.

    The location I want was formaly a cafe. Not just any cafe, but one owned by two former state employees who always had a dream of retireing and going into the restaurant business. (Not a good move unless you want to retire from 40 hour weeks to 20 hour days). So what was their brilliant plan? They opened a New Age Healthy Choice cafe in one of the most conservative and traditional suburban areas. They closed shop two months ago. Guess there’s not a large demand for Tofu in an area full of deer hunters. They shoulda tried Berkeley.

    Anyway, the building inspector told me that the existing 22′ hood and ansul system had to be removed and replaced with a new one. Removal would cost about $7,000 and a new system about $24,000. (that’s if there are no “snags”, which there always is). I asked why a previously inspected and approved syatem needs to be replaced. Here’s his convoluted answer:
    The existing system has been there for eleven years (through two separate owners)and yes, it did pass inspection. However, since the previous owners had not “sold” me the business, but rather just went out of business, and since the codes changed last year, and since the hood system “would have been grandfathered” but the place went empty for two months it is no longer “grandfatherable” (his word).

    But wait, there’s more.

    I also want to take the store next to it and combine the square footage. There is a common wall/partition (not a load bearing wall) dividing the two spots. I was informed by the same inspecter that even though the wall is only a partition, I would need to get an architectual engineer to make drawings and proposals for the removal of the wall (or any part thereof). Estimated additional cost? Who the hell knows?

    After our meeting I drove up the road to my Club and told the story to the boys. One of my friends said I should reconsider before I get into a “world of shit” with these township guys. He seems to make sense.

    [retrieved from moderation - pH]

  22. “Perry, go get help. Seriously, dude, you really need all the help you can get.”

    John, I gladly accept advice from anyone who has good intentions. Over time on here you have not shown me that, so I can hardly take seriously your statement. In fact, I suggest you follow your own advice yourself!

  23. Hoagie-John, I hear you on the bottlenecks. Sorry you ran into them. I have no comment on the inspectors comments, simply because I have no informational basis. My hope is that you can reach a reasonable agreement and proceed with your plans. Sounds like the previous business owners acted on instinct instead of on business expertise, which would have included a survey of the potential for that business in that location.

  24. Sounds like the previous business owners acted on instinct instead of on business expertise,

    Sounds to me like Hoagie didn’t do due diligence before purchasing equipment that didn’t reach code.

  25. I didn’t purchase anything, you moron. I had an inspector come in to meet with me and the landloard BEFORE I EVEN SIGNED A LEASE to tell me what, if anything, I’d need to do to comply with code. Mind your own busines since you NO NOTHING about mine. Looks like it was you failed to do his due diligence before typing.

  26. I didn’t purchase anything,

    So you stole the 22′ hood then?

    Sunds lik yu donnt no yur own busines veri welll, doent it?

  27. Okay, once again for those with bad comprehension. I’m LOOKING to rent a location which has, in that location, a current, working hood system. The hood is already there, I’m not buying anything, it comes with the location if I rent it. But, if I have to REPLACE it for $30,000+, I will not rent that location. Holy crap you’re dense.

  28. Hoagie, my personal thought is that you’d have to be a loon to get into the restaurant business nowadays. That’s probably the most battily (is that a word?) regulated field there is, especially if you want to serve alcohol or do anything a little bit unconventional with your menu.

    And you’d be surprised about new-agey stuff in suburban areas. There’s a vegan/vegetarian cafe and adjoined hippie-food store in suburban North Raleigh that is currently celebrating its 35th birthday. You just never know.

    Anyway, regulations like the ones limiting interior designers are there to limit competition, pure and simple. There are a ton of industries where licensing requirements could easily be made voluntary with no harm.

    And for kicks – here’s a list of occupations for which a license is required under Alabama law (I chose Alabama because it’s first alphabetically and because it’s relatively easy to find this information). My personal favorites are “bowling alleys” and “playing cards.” You need a license to sell playing cards. (Though “peddlers and itinerant vendors” is a pretty good one too.)

  29. Also, there’s a big hullabaloo about people wanting the right to buy and sell raw milk without the government stepping in and shutting it down. Worth mentioning.

  30. You’re right on one thig Jeff, if you have a liquor license in PA, the regs are a nightmare. You’ll note that I pointed out the particular area these folks opened up in is conservative and very traditional. I also pointed out that there is a huge hunting contingent in this area, hell, I’m part of it. Look, they had a dream and just not enough experience to pull it off. But at least they took the shot. I have more respect for that than for someone who never tries but criticizes those who do.

  31. Stregulation is a natural response to unbridled capitalism which has little regard for the social needs of their surroundings. Without the protagonist there would be no antagonist in response. Have you Righties ever given this a thought? Answer: NO! You folks are in it strictly for yourselves, in my opinion. This attitude of yours is quite apparent in this microcosm known as CSPT!

    Perry, the bottom line is you don’t believe in freedom. Or, perhaps more likely, you don’t believe that ordinary people can handle freedom, and thus need an ever bigger government to “Protect” them and make everything “Fair”. The political divide in this country is largely between freedom versus ever more government control. And we know on which side of that line you stand.

  32. Sunds lik yu donnt no yur own busines veri welll, doent it?

    I nominate this for the title of Most Ignorant Comment on this Website Ever. The stupidity displayed is truly amazing!

  33. Yeah, Eric, that “compassionate” socialist busily mocking a dyslexic. It seems Pho has what it takes to enter the Special Olympics, IYKWIMAITYD.

  34. “Perry, the bottom line is you don’t believe in freedom. Or, perhaps more likely, you don’t believe that ordinary people can handle freedom, and thus need an ever bigger government to “Protect” them and make everything “Fair”. The political divide in this country is largely between freedom versus ever more government control. And we know on which side of that line you stand.”

    Eric, haven’t you witnessed what has happened to our economy? Lack of regulation and oversight were major contributing factors. Man is basically a self-centered organism, therefore prone to be greedy. Those of character learn and practice to hold this impulse in check, striking a reasonable balance. Wall Street let this balance slip, and many people have paid the price for their greed in lost jobs, lost pensions, lost homes, and reduced 401K’s. I gather that you did not notice!

  35. Okay, once again for those with bad comprehension. I’m LOOKING to rent a location which has, in that location, a current, working hood system. The hood is already there, I’m not buying anything, it comes with the location if I rent it. But, if I have to REPLACE it for $30,000+, I will not rent that location. Holy crap you’re dense.

    Fine – so it comes with the location. But for those with even worse comprehension – you do your due diligence before renting.

  36. Pho, you said: “Sounds to me like Hoagie didn’t do due diligence before purchasing equipment that didn’t reach code.”

    Now you say: “Fine – so it comes with the location. But for those with even worse comprehension – you do your due diligence before renting.”

    So I went from purchasing equipment to not puchasing equipment and from not doing my due diligence to doing my due diligence in one thread. Thank you.

  37. CRA and FM2 funny accounting principles caused the mortgage bubble. That’s Leftist over-regulation to benefit those who had no business getting mortgages in the first place. And nut-jobs like Calipso Louey, The Justice Brothers, and others suing, threatening to sue, shaking down lenders exacerbated the already terrible government-caused critical situation.

  38. “CRA and FM2 funny accounting principles caused the mortgage bubble. That’s Leftist over-regulation to benefit those who had no business getting mortgages in the first place. And nut-jobs like Calipso Louey, The Justice Brothers, and others suing, threatening to sue, shaking down lenders exacerbated the already terrible government-caused critical situation.”

    Citation please!

  39. Screw your “citation please” dodge, Perry. There have been citations aplenty of this very thing for years on this very site. That your memory vanishes beyond 15 minutes ago is not my problem but yours.

  40. Screw your “citation please” dodge, Perry. There have been citations aplenty of this very thing for years on this very site.

    It’s also been demonstrated that this was not the case, and by continuing to spread lies, you are shown – yet again – to be a liar. Predictable lather, JH.

    [retrieved from moderation - pH]

  41. Riiiiiight. Apart from, you know, the intelligence, the education, the charm and the good looks, you’re just like Matt Damon playing Will Hunting…

    One thing’s for sure: You’re Clark in that movie.

  42. Mr Lynch addresses just how intrusive regulations are these days, and how they are getting worse.

    Uh-huh:

    You get the picture. The great financial crisis of 2008–2009, whose consequences still blight our economy, is sometimes portrayed as a “black swan” or a “100-year flood”—that is, as an extraordinary event that nobody could have predicted. But it was, in fact, just the most recent installment in a recurrent pattern of financial overreach, taxpayer bailout, and subsequent Wall Street ingratitude. And all indications are that the pattern is set to continue.

    Jeff Madrick’s Age of Greed: The Triumph of Finance and the Decline of America, 1970 to the Present is an attempt to chronicle the emergence and persistence of this pattern. It’s not an analytical work, which, as we’ll explain later, sometimes makes the book frustrating reading. Instead, it’s a series of vignettes—and these vignettes are both fascinating and, taken as a group, deeply disturbing. For they suggest not just that we’re seeing a repeating cycle, but that the busts keep getting bigger. And since it seems that nothing was learned from the 2008 crisis, you have to wonder just how bad the next one will be.
    [...]
    There are a lot of villains in this story—so many that by the end of the book we were, frankly, suffering from a bit of outrage fatigue. But why have villains triumphed so repeatedly?

    The proximate answer, clearly, is the abdication of regulatory oversight. From junk bonds to derivatives to sub-prime mortgages, regulators either turned a blind eye or were impeded by business interests and politicians—Democrat as well as Republican. Undoubtedly the most outrageous act—and the most economically damaging to the country—was Greenspan’s refusal to use regulatory powers at his disposal to rein in the exploding sub-prime market, despite being warned repeatedly that a catastrophe was brewing. Like Reagan and Friedman, Greenspan firmly believed in greedism; in his view, the financial markets could do no wrong.

    [retrieved form moderation - pH]

  43. One thing’s for sure: You’re Clark in that movie.

    Well, in the version where Clark is shouted down by a Will Hunting screaming ignorant rhetoric without a shred of evidence, complete with lie after lie and totally ignoring rebuttals showing him to be a complete fool, maybe.

    Will:
    “Socialists!! You’re a socialist and as such, you have absolutely no understanding how the business model works. Rid ourselves of Leftist/Socialist ideology! The TEA Party will give us as the shining light on the hill. Leftist/Socialist take-over of the nation! Straw-man brigades! Go take a flying leap!!”

    Will then collapses on the ground frothing at the mouth and wetting himself. His friend tries to hurry him out of the bar, while the college kids look on in amused disgust.

    We didn’t get that version here.

    [retrieved from moderation - pH]

  44. “Like Reagan and Friedman, Greenspan firmly believed in greedism; in his view, the financial markets could do no wrong. “

    The entire quote is very informative, PiaToR, and this one above highlights the corrupted thinking which, even now, after the 2008-2009 meltdown, continues unabated, and pushed by the likes of Dana Pico on here. There is no rational reason for us to persist with our “greedism”, but we have dispensed with reason and replaced it with the ideology which is proven by faith, not by historical precedence. How crazy is this, folks?

  45. “I have more respect for that than for someone who never tries but criticizes those who do.”

    Hoagie-John, who on here criticizes those who take a shot? I haven’t seen this happen.

    The argument is over whether government regulations are needed or not. Can you imagine the state of our food production if there were no regulations? It is instinctive and understandable for an entrepreneur to cut corners in order to maximize profit.

    The problem with the regulators, as you point out, is that they stick to the letter of the law, even when it seems contraindicated by reasonableness for them to do so.

    I wonder if you have ever put yourself into the position of a regulator/inspector, that if they bend the rules and regulations and then something goes wrong, their jobs are on the line. Have you? Do you?

    The tension between entrepreneur and regulator is to be expected, but do we dump the regulator/regulations/inspector because of this tension?

    Even in the best of marriages, there are “regulations” and there are tensions. These are an integral part of living our lives, so we contend with them, or disaster follows is bound to follow!

  46. “The argument is over whether government regulations are needed or not.”

    No Perry, the argument is when do regulations become stregulations. How many regulations are enough? Should the lawmakers and regulators take into consideration the undue impact of those regulations on the people they are regulating? Perhaps they should ask if the proposed regulations help or hinder the situation. You seem to believe that if anything can or does go wrong it means we just don’t have enough regulations. That translates to me that you think we should all live in a perfectly safe little utopia where no one is subject to any risk or discomfort because the governments have considered all the rules to protect us. That’s rediculous and we can get to a point where we’re regulated to stagnation.

    Gotta go my pool guy and gardener just walked past the grotto. That’s what I need on a Monday morning, guys running all over the property making noise when June’s sleeping. I have more to respond to so I’ll continue later.

  47. The argument is over whether government regulations are needed or not. Can you imagine the state of our food production if there were no regulations?

    Actually, you don’t have to. Go and read Swindled by Bee Wilson – that’s the situation that holds when lack of regulations take hold.

    One key point about the US that gets attention overseas is how dangerous your food is, generally due to lax regulations and insufficient enforcement over your supply chain. The contamination scandals get a fair bit of play overseas.

  48. No Perry, the argument is when do regulations become stregulations.

    Well, I hereby deem regulations hippripomous and supercalifrumptious. Since I have just made up some positive words, this proves that regulations are positive things. i mean, since we’re proceeding on an argument on the basis of made-up words with no operational definition…

  49. You mean a guy of your massive intellect, god-like abilities and superhuman talents couldn’t figure out that stregulation is just a coined term for strangeling-regulations? How disappointing.

    Now i guess you’re an expert on food production and distribution because you read “a book”. Oy vay.

  50. Yeah, Pho couldn’t be bothered by reading the actual article at the top of the thread nor by following the link in the actual article at the top of the thread.

    That’s because postmodernists are absolutely incapable of following context or overarching concepts.

  51. Eric, haven’t you witnessed what has happened to our economy? Lack of regulation and oversight were major contributing factors. Man is basically a self-centered organism, therefore prone to be greedy. Those of character learn and practice to hold this impulse in check, striking a reasonable balance. Wall Street let this balance slip, and many people have paid the price for their greed in lost jobs, lost pensions, lost homes, and reduced 401K’s. I gather that you did not notice!

    Perry, this is left wing spin. We all know what caused the economy to slump, and that was real estate. Specifically, the sub-prime lending crisis. NOw, who made all those banks issue loans to people who were at too much risk? Hint: It wasn’t the free market.

  52. Eric, haven’t you witnessed what has happened to our economy? Lack of regulation and oversight were major contributing factors. Man is basically a self-centered organism, therefore prone to be greedy.

    PS This is the strange liberal tendency that, when arguing about the need for government, assumes people are essentially rotten. It assumes people can’t handle freedom and responsibility, and thus we need Big Government to step in. Well, the citizens of this country handled freedom just fine for most of this nation’s history. Unlike you, I see people as essentially good, and therefore worthy to live in a state of freedom. You, apparently, do not.

  53. Eric, haven’t you witnessed what has happened to our economy? Lack of regulation and oversight were major contributing factors. Man is basically a self-centered organism, therefore prone to be greedy. Those of character learn and practice to hold this impulse in check, striking a reasonable balance. Wall Street let this balance slip, and many people have paid the price for their greed in lost jobs, lost pensions, lost homes, and reduced 401K’s. I gather that you did not notice!

    Perry, this is left wing spin. We all know what caused the economy to slump, and that was real estate. Specifically, the sub-prime lending crisis. NOw, who made all those banks issue loans to people who were at too much risk? Hint: It wasn’t the free market.

    Is this your impression which you get from FNN, Rush, and the like, Eric?

    I think you are misinformed, or at least poorly informed, or haven’t bothered to look into this this issue in more detail. I honestly don’t know.

    They are not spin, all facts, but brevity precludes a long discussion.

    Please tell me how the banks were “made” to make those loans, Eric. I will agree that they were encouraged to promote home ownership, which turned out to be part of the problem, but not the whole problem.

    Moreover, you know that the banks made these loans without due diligence to check on the credit worthiness of the applicants. You also know that the investment banks packaged these near worthless loans and sold these world wide, while betting against their own security packages. And you do know that these activities contributed to the global Great Recession that we have been experiencing. At least I hope you know all this.

  54. Perry, none of that changes the fact that it was bad loans that triggered the whole thing. And you are right, the banks were “Encouraged” to make those loans, this after decades of sound banking practice that had discouraged banks from doing just that, and which had worked. And, of course, let’s not neglect the role of those august institutions, Fannie and Freddy and their biggest cheerleaders, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd.

  55. Specifically, the sub-prime lending crisis. NOw, who made all those banks issue loans to people who were at too much risk? Hint: It wasn’t the free market.

    This has previously been demonstrated to be a lie.

  56. Hoagie, I hope you don’t think I’m criticizing you for taking a shot at the restaurant business. In fact, it’s just the opposite. Anyone who can look at that business with its uncertainty, difficulty, and maze of regulations and jump in with two feet is okay by me.

  57. Unlike you, I see people as essentially good, and therefore worthy to live in a state of freedom. You, apparently, do not.

    Eric, here’s where you and I differ in our routes to the Limited Government the Founders and Framers fought for and designed. I view people as basically evil, thus the need to severely limit the power of government. Since people are basically evil (fallen in nature), a powerful Central Government will necessarily tend toward tyranny. As such, no Central Government should be granted any more power than absolutely necessary to protect the nation from enemies without and to prevent total anarchy.

    Diffuse government, and limited at that, should always be the goal, and was the goal of the Founders and Framers. That is decidedly not the goal of Liberals, so-called Progressives (who are in actuality Socialists), outright Socialists. The Left’s goal is, without a doubt, as powerful and intrusive a Central Government as possible, with the aim of ever-increasing power and intrusiveness. Freedom and Liberty be damned with that group.

  58. “One key point about the US that gets attention overseas is how dangerous your food is, generally due to lax regulations and insufficient enforcement over your supply chain. The contamination scandals get a fair bit of play overseas.”

    Really Pho? Our food supply is dangerous? Tell that to the 40 people who died from Ecoli from organic farms in Germany. The U.S. is #1 in farming and agriculture and we feed more people than any other country. As usual your hate for America trumps your common sense. There is nothing America could ever do which would make you happy. Oh wait, perhaps if we all droped dead. That whould make you happy, wouldn’t it?

  59. Really Pho? Our food supply is dangerous?

    Yes. This has been extensively documented.

  60. The U.S. is #1 in farming and agriculture and we feed more people than any other country.

    That would be China, I believe – the world’s largest wheat producer.

  61. Really Pho? Our food supply is dangerous?

    Yes. This has been extensively documented.”

    I’m not up to snuff on this issue. Is it the extensive genetic modification that we use, having virtually unknown long term consequences? I’ve never understood, nor researched Europe’s vociferous objections to genetic modifications.

  62. I’m not up to snuff on this issue. Is it the extensive genetic modification that we use, having virtually unknown long term consequences? I’ve never understood, nor researched Europe’s vociferous objections to genetic modifications.

    No. Actually, I’m fairly easy about genetic modifications per se – I’m worried if they make plants do stuff like grow their own insecticide, but plants tweaked to grow faster don’t worry me too much – and animals worry me less than plants and especially bacteria (who can share genetic material extensively).

    I can’t recall the exact book I wanted to cite. It dealt with contamination – sometimes deliberate for the sake of profit – in the American food system. The reoccurring e-coli outbreaks are only the tip of teh iceberg.

    It might be this:

    http://www.amazon.com/Poison-Plate-Dangers-Food-Avoid/dp/1900512459/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_1

    You might find these interesting

    http://www.amazon.com/Appetite-Profit-industry-undermines-health/dp/1560259329/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1309733846&sr=1-1
    http://www.amazon.com/Food-Inc-Participant-Industrial-Poorer/dp/1586486942/ref=pd_sim_b_1
    http://www.amazon.com/Fast-Food-Nation-Dark-All-American/dp/0060938455

Comments are closed.