SmarterthanYou
rebel
there were, and still are, regulations that prohibit that activity but it seems that OSHA couldn't find it important enough to go inspect the company. so who was at fault?
Barton: Second Amendment Guarantees An Individual Right To Own A Tank Or Fighter Jet
- Thread starter Timshel
- Start date
I am painfully aware of those stories and the reality that companies do not deliberately try to kill their employees, their customers or members of their communities; only dimwitted asshats make such claims. I am also painfully aware that you cannot legislate away accidents, mistakes or negligence. Only brain dead naive dimwits think that laws stop accidents or negligence from happening and think that the Government inspects every aspect of businesses to ensure that mistakes never happen.
You are a dullard of the highest order that will willingly subjugate your liberties to be a willing ward of the state. Bravo, you have removed all doubt you are one of the low information gullible lemmings who voted for this inexperienced dipshit who now willingly allows the shutdown of Government services for purely partisan political purposes.
I am painfully aware of those stories and the reality that companies do not deliberately try to kill their employees, their customers or members of their communities; only dimwitted asshats make such claims. I am also painfully aware that you cannot legislate away accidents, mistakes or negligence. Only brain dead naive dimwits think that laws stop accidents or negligence from happening and think that the Government inspects every aspect of businesses to ensure that mistakes never happen.
You are a dullard of the highest order that will willingly subjugate your liberties to be a willing ward of the state. Bravo, you have removed all doubt you are one of the low information gullible lemmings who voted for this inexperienced dipshit who now willingly allows the shutdown of Government services for purely partisan political purposes.
Deliberately, no they just hope by cutting corners, cutting costs and ignoring regulations that nothing bad I'll happen, they gamble and often, like the miners and the chemical plants, or the Exon Valdez, they lose and innocent people pay with their lives.
I am painfully aware of those stories and the reality that companies do not deliberately try to kill their employees, their customers or members of their communities; only dimwitted asshats make such claims. I am also painfully aware that you cannot legislate away accidents, mistakes or negligence. Only brain dead naive dimwits think that laws stop accidents or negligence from happening and think that the Government inspects every aspect of businesses to ensure that mistakes never happen.
You are a dullard of the highest order that will willingly subjugate your liberties to be a willing ward of the state. Bravo, you have removed all doubt you are one of the low information gullible lemmings who voted for this inexperienced dipshit who now willingly allows the shutdown of Government services for purely partisan political purposes.
Your opinion of me does not matter or add strength to your posts, in fact it makes you look desperate.
And the penalties and lawsuits far exceed safety rules. The fact is that negligence will happen and it is naive to believe that a lack of regulations or more regulations will prevent accidents. It is equally naive and dense to believe that Government can inspect all businesses to ensure voluntary compliance and prevent accidents and unsound practices from occurring.
Again; Companies would not be in business long if they are in the habit of killing their customers or employees. The claim that they will do so without regulation is quite dumb.
My appologies; you don't deserve to be insulted like that. You have been civil and deserve to be treated the same.
Sorry.
It is foolish of you to believe that companies will monitor themselves if there are no regulations.
Thank you, I appreciate it.
Just as it is foolish of you to think Regulations are needed to keep them from killing their customers and their employees.
Just as it is foolish of you to think Regulations are needed to keep them from killing their customers and their employees.
So, you wish to do away with food regulations, drilling regulations, mining regulations, children toys nd clothing regulations? You think we will be safer and businesses will self regulate?
Is this honestly your opinion?
Yes, that is honestly my opinion; let the States handle that type of regulation. The Federal Government has no business regulating anything except for administering our laws, protecting our borders and defending the nation and our interests abroad.
We don't need the departments of agriculture, commerce, education, energy, housing or labor. The savings from closing these wasteful Executive departments would be HUGE.
In addition, we the sheeple, do not need to pay for a White House staff consisting of 1,700 of which 400 are office staff; REALLY?
In addition, we don't need the tax code; it should be replaced with a Fair (consumption) Tax or a flat tax.
In addition, we the sheeple, don't need to pay for Congressional staffs that consist of 18 permanent staffers at an average cost for each Congressman and Senator of $701,136 to $1,636,750. Can you imagine the savings cutting this clutter in half. Most of which could occur by eliminating all subsidies, the tax code and going to a Fair Tax.
In addition, if we the sheeple woke up and abolished the tax code for a simpler system, imagine the savings to be had by reducing the IRS from 88,203 full-time employees to even half that many.
Yes Rana, the Federal Government was never constitutionally authorized to run roughshod over the States and duplicate what could already be accomplished by each state so we do not need all their regulations piled on top of State regulations.
The economic boom that would occur by reigning in this massive unconstitutional overgrowth of a Federal Government would be so profound we wouldn’t need to worry about forcing others to pay for a welfare class of dependent fools who can’t find work; there would be more jobs than people to fill them.
I can't imagine the cost to states to monitor food, drug, energy, education, housing and labor. If you think your federal taxes are high, imagine what they would be if the state took over regulating these areas.
/MSG/
Uwaa OmO
Most states already do. The way the current system is set up (and this is very general since we're talking about ALL regulations for EVERYTHING) is that the Fed has a standard and that's the minimum states are required to meet, but there are exceptions and latitudes and exemptions given both at the Fed and at the state level, so it's already a massive clusterfuck of regulations and laws. So you have two options available; remove all exemptions and variances and what not and have a single, uniform federal standard to apply to everything in a particular iundustry or subset or whatever, or you get the federal level out entirely and leave it to states and only impose the most minimum of federal restrictions (like weights and measures) and leave the rest up to the states.
Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
Yes, that is honestly my opinion; let the States handle that type of regulation. The Federal Government has no business regulating anything except for administering our laws, protecting our borders and defending the nation and our interests abroad.
We don't need the departments of agriculture, commerce, education, energy, housing or labor. The savings from closing these wasteful Executive departments would be HUGE.
In addition, we the sheeple, do not need to pay for a White House staff consisting of 1,700 of which 400 are office staff; REALLY?
In addition, we don't need the tax code; it should be replaced with a Fair (consumption) Tax or a flat tax.
In addition, we the sheeple, don't need to pay for Congressional staffs that consist of 18 permanent staffers at an average cost for each Congressman and Senator of $701,136 to $1,636,750. Can you imagine the savings cutting this clutter in half. Most of which could occur by eliminating all subsidies, the tax code and going to a Fair Tax.
In addition, if we the sheeple woke up and abolished the tax code for a simpler system, imagine the savings to be had by reducing the IRS from 88,203 full-time employees to even half that many.
Yes Rana, the Federal Government was never constitutionally authorized to run roughshod over the States and duplicate what could already be accomplished by each state so we do not need all their regulations piled on top of State regulations.
The economic boom that would occur by reigning in this massive unconstitutional overgrowth of a Federal Government would be so profound we wouldn’t need to worry about forcing others to pay for a welfare class of dependent fools who can’t find work; there would be more jobs than people to fill them.
The cost to monitor anything at the state level would make MORE sense and cost LESS than attempting to do EVERYTHING at the Federal level which is inconsistent with the intent of the Constitution.
Again, imagine the tax savings at the Federal level we the sheeple would realize if they implemented my ideas along with a Fair Tax.
We the sheeple have much more control over the State Government than we do at the Federal level. Why if they took my Constitutional ideas along with the Fair Tax, we might even get back to a part time Congress focused on International and border issues instead of the great failed nanny state that has NEVER worked.....EVER.
Yes, that is honestly my opinion; let the States handle that type of regulation. The Federal Government has no business regulating anything except for administering our laws, protecting our borders and defending the nation and our interests abroad.
We don't need the departments of agriculture, commerce, education, energy, housing or labor. The savings from closing these wasteful Executive departments would be HUGE.
In addition, we the sheeple, do not need to pay for a White House staff consisting of 1,700 of which 400 are office staff; REALLY?
In addition, we don't need the tax code; it should be replaced with a Fair (consumption) Tax or a flat tax.
In addition, we the sheeple, don't need to pay for Congressional staffs that consist of 18 permanent staffers at an average cost for each Congressman and Senator of $701,136 to $1,636,750. Can you imagine the savings cutting this clutter in half. Most of which could occur by eliminating all subsidies, the tax code and going to a Fair Tax.
In addition, if we the sheeple woke up and abolished the tax code for a simpler system, imagine the savings to be had by reducing the IRS from 88,203 full-time employees to even half that many.
Yes Rana, the Federal Government was never constitutionally authorized to run roughshod over the States and duplicate what could already be accomplished by each state so we do not need all their regulations piled on top of State regulations.
The economic boom that would occur by reigning in this massive unconstitutional overgrowth of a Federal Government would be so profound we wouldn’t need to worry about forcing others to pay for a welfare class of dependent fools who can’t find work; there would be more jobs than people to fill them.
The cost to monitor anything at the state level would make MORE sense and cost LESS than attempting to do EVERYTHING at the Federal level which is inconsistent with the intent of the Constitution.
Again, imagine the tax savings at the Federal level we the sheeple would realize if they implemented my ideas along with a Fair Tax.
We the sheeple have much more control over the State Government than we do at the Federal level. Why if they took my Constitutional ideas along with the Fair Tax, we might even get back to a part time Congress focused on International and border issues instead of the great failed nanny state that has NEVER worked.....EVER.
I agree with changing the tax code.
Ahhhhhh....perhaps we have achieved some common ground? Fair (consumption)Tax, flat tax or something you think it should be that I might not agree with?
You still have federal involvement, it appears that some want no federal involvement.
I think either would be better than the current system, but most likely lean towards a flat tax.
The Fair Tax is better in that it would also tax the underground economy and eliminate Federal tax paperwork. But I would support a flat tax if I cannot convince enough voters to go for the Fair Tax. The economic boom that would ensue would stun even the most ardent detractor.
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=HowFairTaxWorks
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer
Thanks for the info.